Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/authenticreportoOOpoperich 


THE 


AUTHENTIC     REPORT 


OF    TKt 


DISCUSSION, 

WHICH    TOOK    PLACE    AT 

THE  LECTURE-ROOMOFTHE  DUBLIN  INSTITUTION 

BETWEEN 

THE  REV.  THOMAS  MAGUIRE, 

AND 

THE   REV.   RICHARD  T.   P.   POPE 


D.  &  J.  SADLIER, 

31  BARCLAY  STREET,  NEW  YORK. 

128    FEDERAL     STREET,     BOSTON;      Alf© 
iro  NOTRE  DAME  ST^'F.FT    iMONTREAL,  r.^ 


:77^ 


-?c 


INTRO]) UCTOllY  STATEMENT 


As  introductory  to  the  Report  of  the  important  Controversial 
Discussion  between  the  Rev.  Messrs.  Pope  and  Maguire,  we 
feel  It  our  duty  to  lay  before  the  Public  the  arrangements  which 
preceded  the  meetings  for  the  above  object. 

A  meeting  was  held  on  Wednesday,  the  11th  of  April,  1827, 
at  the  house  of  Mr.  Tims,  in  Grafton  street,  at  which  Messrs, 
Pope  and  Maguire  were  present ;  when  it  was  resolved,  that  as 
the  points  about  to  be  discussed  equally  affected  the  Protestant 
and  Roman  Catholic  Churches,  so  there  should  be  an  equality 
in  every  particular,  in  order  that  the  public,  on  the  after  consid- 
eration, might  be  satisfied  that  the  Discussion  had  been  conducted 
in  the  most  impartial  manner,  and  entered  upon  with  the  spirit  of 
kindness  and  mutual  good  feeling. 

After  several  meetings,  in  which  we  have  the  gratification  to 
say,  every  disposition  was  evinced  on  both  sides  to  act  with 
liberality  and  candor,  while  at  the  same  time  principle  was  upheld 
with  uncompromising  steadiness,  the  Reverend  Gentlemen  having 
finally  settled  the  points  for  discussion,  and  the  undersigned, 
definitely  and  with  their  entire  approbation,  having  arranged  the 
preliminaries,  the  day  of  meeting  was  fixed  for  the  19th  day  of 
April.  From  the  impossibility  of  procuring  the  Rotunda  for  six 
successive  days,  (the  shortest  time  the  discussion  could  last,) 
and  no  more  spacious  or  equally  commodious  place  for  meeting 
presentmg  itself,  the  Lecture-room  of  the  Dublin  Institution, 
Sackville  street,  was  taken  ;  and  in  the  result  manifested  that,  as 
to  situation,  necessity  bad  compelled,  what  judgment  ultimately 
oporoved  _ 

920 


i  INTRODUCTORY    STATEMENT. 

The  preliminaries  entered  into  were  as  follows : 

I. 

Arrangement  agreed  upon  for  the  proposed  discussion  between  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Pope  and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Maguire,  April  12,  1827. 

I.  The  Discus&ion  to  commence  on  Thursday,  the  19th 
instant,  and  continue  from  day  to  day  until  closed. 

II.  The  Meetings  to  be  presided  over  by  two  Chairmen,  one 
Protestant  and  one  Roman  Catholic. 

III.  The  business  to  commence  each  day  at  eleven  o'clock, 
and  to  close  at  three,  with  the  exception  of  the  first  day,  which 
will  close  at  four  o'clock. 

IV.  The  Discussion  to  be  limited  to  three  points  by  each 
party,  viz : 

MR.  POPE. 

1st,  Infallibility ;  2d,  Purgatory ;  3d,  Transubstantiation. 
MR.  MAGUIRE. 

1st,  The  divine  right  of  private  judgment  to  pronounce  upon 
the  authenticity^  integrity,  and  canoniciiy,  of  Scripture,  and 
to  determine  its  meaning  in  articles  of  faith. 

2d,  The  justification  of  the  Reformation. 

3d,  The  Protestant  Churches  do  not  possess  that  unity  which 
forms  the  distinctive  mark  of  the  true  Church  of  Christ. 

V.  The  points  to  be  discussed  in  the  following  order : 

1st  day,      -     -     -     Mr.  Pope,  1st  point. 
2d    do.        -     -     -     Mr,  Maguire,  do. 
3d   do.        -     -     -     Mr.  Pope,  2d  point. 
4th  do^        -     -     -     Mr.  Maguire,  do. 
5th  do.        -     -     -     Mr.  Pope,  3d  point. 
6th  do.        -     -     -     Mr.  Maguire,  do. 
YI.  Not  more  than  one  point  to  be  spoken  to  at  a  time. 

VII.  No  new  point  to  be  spoken  to  by  either  party,  until  the 
pomt  under  consideration  is  fully  and  finally  closed. 

VIII.  The  speeches  and  replies  to  be  limited  to  half  an  hour, 
and  each  point  to  occupy  but  one  day  at  the  utmost. 

N.  B.  The  number  of  minutes  which  may  be  lost  before  the 
beginning  of  each  day's  discussion,  to  be  added  to  the 
period  of  closing  the  business  of  the  day. 

IX.  Admission  to  be  by  tickets  only,  for  which  shall  be  charged 
the  sum  of  ,  the  surplun  of  money  so  collected,  after 
defraying  all  the  expenses  attending  the  Discussion,  to  be  handed 
over  to  the  Mendicity. 

X.  The  Meeting  to  be  open  to  the  Press,  but  a  special 
Reporter  for  each  party  to  be  employed,  who  shall  be  responsible 


INTRODUCTORY    STATEMENT.  O 

for  the  accuracy  of  the  reports  that  shall  be  made  of  the  speeches, 
and  entire  business  of  the  discussion.* 

XI.  Two  door-keepers  to  be  provided,  one  Roman  Catholic 
and  one  Protestant. 

XII.  No  indication  to  be  admitted  of  approbation  or  disappro- 
bation. 

XIII.  The  authorised  copy  of  the  speeches  to  be  authenticated 
by  the  signatures  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pope,  and  Rev.  Mr.  Maguire. 

T.  Maguire,  P-  M.  Singer, 

Richard  T.  P.  Pope,         John  Lav^less. 

II. 

Further  Preliminary  Regulations  for  the  Proceedings  of  the  Meeting 
of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pope,  and  Rev.  Mr.  Maguire,  agreed  to  hy  the 
undersigned,  on  the  part  of  the  above  Gentlemen  respectively. 

I.  No  person  whatever  to  be  permitted  to  address  the  meeting 
but  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pope,  and  Rev.  Mr.  Maguire. 

II.  No  part  of  the  auditory  to  interfere  in  any  way  whatever 
with  the  Rev.  Gentlemen  above  named,  or  with  the  subject 
matter  of  the  discussion. 

III.  The  undersigned  to  be  at  liberty  to  explain  any  part  of 
the  preliminary  arrangements,  if  called  upon  to  do  so  from  the 
Chair. 

IV.  The  Chairmen  are  requested  to  prevent  any  manifestation 
of  approbation  or  disapprobation,  and  to  enforce  perfect  silence 
in  the  meeting. 

P.  iE.  Singer, 
Dublin^  \Sih  April,  1827.  John  Law^less. 

III. 

Further  Articles  of  Agreement  entered  into  hy  the  undersigned,  on 
the  part  of  Messrs.  Pope  and  Maguire. 

I.  The  parties  not  to  exceed  four  speeches  each  during  any 
one  day.  Merely  calling  on  the  opposite  party  for  proofs  not 
to  be  considered  as  a  speech. 

II.  Declining  to  speak  in  turn  by  either  party,  when  it  is  his 
rotation,  or  speaking  short  of  the  limited  period  of  half  an  hour, 
to  be  considered  as  one  of  the  four  speeches  of  the  day. 

III.  The  business  of  each  day  to  close  after  each  party  has 
spoken,  or  had  the  opportunity  of  speakingybwr  times,  although 
it  should  not  have  reached  the  hour  of  three  o'clock ;  it  being 
hereby  again  declared  that  agreeably  to  the  regulations  of  the 
12th  instant,  should  the  discussion  reach  three  o'clock,  the 
number  of  minutes  which  may  have  elapsed  after  eleven  o'clock, 

'the  hour  fixed  for  commencing  the  discussion  on  each  day) 

*  The  Special  Reporters  appointed  on  this  occasion  were  Mr.  P.  D.  Hard? 
and  Mr.  J.  Sheridan. 

1* 


6  INTRODUCTORY^    STATEMENT. 

shall  be  added  to  the  time  allotted  to  the  last  speaker,  on  er  ch 
day,  so  as  to  complete  his  half  hour,  should  he  desire  to  continue 
for  that  time,  although  such  addition  shall  exceed  three  o'clock 
by  so  many  minutes.  P.  M,  Singer, 

20th  *BpriU  1827.  John  Lawless. 

The  chairs  having  been  taken,  on  the  morning  of  the  19th  of 
April  by  Admiral  Oliver,  as  the  Protestant,  and  Daniel 
3'CoNNELL,  Esq,  as  the  Roman  Catholic  Chairman,  the  latter 
briefly  observed,  '•  That  he  considered  it  necessary  to  state,  that 
the  Gentlemen  who  had  been  appointed  to  make  the  preliminary 
arrangements  would  read  the  particular  rules  by  which  the 
»iieeting  was  to  be  governed ;  and  as  he  felt  assured  that  the 
mere  reading  of  the  rules  v/ould  be  quite  sufficient  to  induce 
every  gentleman  to  comply  with  them,  he  would  not  make  any 
further  observations.'' 

The  friend  appointed  by  Mr.  Pope  having  been  then  called 
upon,  the  document  No.  2,  was  read,  as  containing  the  rules 
immediately  relating  to  the  meeting. 

The  undersigned,  in  making  the  foregoing  statement,  have 
discharged  a  duty  which  they  felt  to  be  incumbent  upon  them  ; 
and  they  have  to  express  their  gratification,  that  so  important  a 
discussion,  and  one  so  likely  to  excite  the  mind  beyond  the  exact 
limits  of  discretion,  was  conducted  with  becoming  zeal,  but  at 
the  same  time  with  good  feeling,  and  a  conduct  suited  to  the 
momentous  business  in  hand.  They  are  also  equally  gratified, 
that  the  arrangements  which  they  entered  into,  were  such  as  to 
give  satisfaction  to  the  auditory,  and  ensure  that  regularity  and 
silence  which  became  the  solemnity  of  the  occasion. 

P.  JE.  SINGER, 
JOHN  LAWLESS. 


I  certify  that  the  Report  of  the  recent  Discussion  between  Mr.  Pope  anc 
myself,  as  published  by  Messrs.  Coyne,  Tims,  &  Curry,  is  alone  authentic, 
Cbch  proof  sheet  havincr  received  my  signature. 
June  14,  1827.  THOMAS  MAGUIRE. 

Philip  Dixon  Hardy, 
James  Sheridan. 


I  certify  that  the  Report  of  the  recent  Discussion  between  Mr.  Maguira 
and  myself,  as  pubhshed  by  Messrs.  Coyne,  Tims,  &  Curry,  is  alone  authentic, 
each  proof  sheet  having  received  my  signature. 
Jtne  14,  1827.  RICHARD  T   P.  POPE, 

James  Sheridan, 
Phimp  Dixon  Hardt. 


CONTROVERSIAL  DISCUSSION 


First  Day.— April  19,  1827. 


SUBJECT. — The  Infallibility  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Ckwch. 

The  Chair  having  been  taken  by  Admiral  Ohver  and  Mr. 
O'Connell,  and  the  particular  rules,  by  which  the  discussion  was 
to  be  governed,  read  by  Mr.  Singer. 

The  Rev.  Mr.  Pope  rose,  and  said — Gentlemen,  I  need 
scarcely  remark,  that  we  are  assembled  here  this  day,  for  the 
discussion  of  the  most  important  subjects  which  can  possibly 
engage  the  human  mind.  We  are  not  assembled  to  debate  a 
question  relative  to  the  politics  of  this  passing  scene — we  have 
not  come  here  for  the  purpose  of  discussing  matters  which  con- 
cern us  merely  as  the  inhabitants  of  this  lower  world  ;  but  to 
debate  topics  of  the  most  vital  consequence  to  us  as  immortal  and 
accountable  beings.  Let  us  then,  in  entering  on  this  momentous 
discussion,  divest  ourselves  of  every  party  feeling,  and  come  to 
the  consideration  of  the  subject  before  us  with  minds  unbiassed 
and  unprejudiced.  And  here  it  may  not  be  uninteresting  to  this 
meeting  to  be  put  in  possession  of  the  circumstances  which  led 
to  the  present  discussion.  While  in  Longford,  in  November 
last,  I  received  a  letter  from  an  individual,  (whom  I  afterwards 
discovered  to  be  a  Roman  Catholic  of  no  inconsiderable  informa- 
tion) in  which  it  was  stated,  that  I  was  challenged  by  a  Roman 
Catholic  Clergyman  to  meet  him  in  public,  for  the  purpose  of 
discussing  the  points  of  difference  between  the  Protestant  and 
the  Roman  Catholic  churches  ;  and  that  I  had  then  a  fair  oppor- 
tunity of  defending  the  principles  which  I  maintaine»i  and  of 
exposing  in  the  face  of  the  world,  the  errors  of  the  church  of 
Rome,  if  any  such  errors  existed.  I  considered  it  judicious  to 
wait,  until  the  challenge  should  reach  me  in  an  authentic  form 
In  a  day  or  two  afterwards,  I  saw  in  the  Weekly  Register,  of 
the  23d  November,  an  account  of  an  Aggregate  Meeting  at 
Carrick-on-Shannon,  and  which  contained  a  speech  made  by 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Maguire,  in  which  was  the  following  passage  :- 


6  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

"  Let  the  advocates  of  such  a  system,  the  Wolffes  and  the  Popes 
of  the  day,  bring  (!*«  matter  to  an  issue,  and  I  challenge  WolfTe 
or  Pope  to  meet  nic  and  answer  the  question  of  the  Socinian, 
and  prove  from  the  prir*r;iplos  of  private  judgment  that  he  la 
wrong ;  or  if  thoy  l>c  able  to  answer  the  question  in  any  way 
but  that  in  which  the  Catholic  church  answers  it,  I  will  myself 
become  a  Biblical,  and  go  through  the  country  on  the  same  mis- 
sion as  they  are  on — but  they  will  not,  they  cannot." 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Hibernian  Society,  which  took  place  on 
the  following  Tuesday,  I  commented  on  the  Socinian  question, 
expressed  my  willingness  to  meet  Mr.  Maguire,  and  requested 
that,  if  there  were  any  Roman  Catholics  at  the  meeting,  they 
would  convey  my  answer  to  Mr.  Maguire.  Fearing,  however, 
that  my  observations  might  escape  his  notice,  and  being  anxious 
that  he  should  not  be  ignorant  of  my  readiness  to  meet  him,  I 
addressed  a  letter  to  the  Editor  of  the  Roscommon  and  Leitrim 
Gazette,  which,  after  treating  on  the  subject  of  the  Socinian 
controversy,  concludes  thus  : — "  And  now.  Sir,  in  conclusion, 
I  beg  leave  to  state,  that  I  am  ready  to  discuss  the  subject  of 
this  letter,  or  the  Roman  Catholic  controversy  generally,  with 
Mr.  Maguire,  or  any  other  gentleman,  believing  that  "magna  est 
Veritas  et  prajvalebit." 

Such,  then,  gentlemen,  was  my  acceptance  of  what  I  con- 
ceived to  be  a  challenge  from  Mr.  Maguire.  Some  time  after, 
a  letter  appeared  in  the  Weekly  Register,  from  Mr.  Maguire, 
in  which  he  gives  the  following  report  of  a  part  of  his  speech 
at  Carrick-on-Shannon: — "  I  there  observed,"  he  says,  "  that  in 
flippancy  of  tongue,  tortuosity  of  mind,  and  sophistry  of  argu- 
ment, the  Bible-men  stood  unrivalled;  but  that  were  I  to  meet 
the  arch-crusader  on  the  arena  of  polemical  disputation,  (and 
this  handsome  compliment  I  intended  for  you)  I  would  confine 
him  to  a  few  solid,  stubborn  objections,  of  which,  if  he  gave  a 
clear  logical  solution,  I  myself  would  become  a  Biblical,  and 
raise  my  feeble  voice  in  the  loud,  holy,  profitable  cry."  To- 
wards the  conclusion  of  this  letter,  he  grounds  a  proposal  upon 
a  concession  which  I  could  never  grant,  namely,  "  That  the  ob- 
jection cf  the  Socinian  remains  unanswered  and  unanswerable, 
(the  principle  and  practice  of  private  interpretation  alone  consid- 
ered)." His  proposal  was  as  follows  : — "Should  you  have  the 
manliness  to  make  this  necessary  admission,  which  I  must  insist 
upon  as  a  sine  qua  non,  I  shall  afford  you  ampler  canvass,  and  a 
rougher  sea,  viz  :  of  all  the  charges  which  have  been,  and  now 
can  be  advanced  against  the  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
church,  you  shall  be  at  liberty  to  select  whatever  three  you  deem 
most  glaring  and  untenable,  whilst  I,  in  my  turn,  shall  bring 
three  prime  charges  against  the  doctrines  of  your  church,  and 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  9 

thus  we  shall  be  both  plaintiff  and  defendant  reciprocally."  In 
my  next  letter  to  Mr.  Maguire,  I  observed,  "  It  is  apparent  from 
your  own  report,  that  you  either  did  not  challenge  me,  or  that 
you  have  retracted  the  challenge  ;  the  expression  '  were  I  to 
meet  the  arch-crusader,'  conveying  most  undoubtedly  a  very  dif- 
ferent meaning  from  that  contained  in  the  words,  '  I  challenge 
Wolffe  or  Pope  to  meet  me,'  ascribed  to  you  in  the  Register. 
I  here  distinctly  call  upon  you  either  publicly  to  confess  that  you 
did  not  challenge  me,  or  to  meet  me  for  public  discussion,  'Utrum 
horum  mavis  accipe.'  I  write  strongly,  but  not  in  the  spirit 
of  polemical  bravado."  I  shall  now  rea  f  to  you  the  concluding 
paragraph  of  Mr.  Maguire's  last  letter  .  "  I  do  declare,  dis- 
tinctly, that  I  never  did  invite  you  to  3.tiva  voce  disputation  ; — 
and  I  as  distinctly  declare,  that  I  now  accept  your  challenge 
and  will  meet  you  at  the  Rotunda,  in  Dublin."  He  says,  he 
never  did  challenge  me — you,  gentlemen,  will  judge,  whether  I 
had  not  reason  to  consider  his  speech  reported  in  the  Register, 
as  containing  a  challenge.  I  again  wrote  to  Mr.  Maguire,  and 
the  result  of  that  correspondence  has  been,  that  after  an  amica- 
ble arrangement  of  prelimmaries,  we  are  met  here  this  day  to 
discuss  the  various  subjects  which  have  been  agreed  upon  ;  and 
I  most  willingly  bear  testimony  to  the  good  feeling  which  has 
been  evinced  by  my  reverend  opponent  and  his  friend. 

Permit  me  to  say,  gentlemen,  that  we  should  hail  the  appear- 
ance of  Mr.  Maguire  amongst  us  this  day,  as  exhibiting  a 
noble  display  of  independent  feeling  and  judgment.  I  say,  it  is  a 
noble  display  of  independent  feeling — it  is  manly  and  bold  in 
Mr.  Maguire  to  appear  here  to  advocate  his  principles  ;  espe- 
cially as  it  is  well  known  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Primate  of 
Ireland  has  publicly  expressed  his  disapprobation  of  such  a 
proceeding.  I  say,  then,  it  is  manly  and  bold  in  him,  circum- 
stanced as  he  is,  thus  to  come  forward  and  claim  his  privilege,  as 
an  intellectual  and  rational  being,  of  thinking  and  acting  foi 
himself.  The  present  meeting  is  certainly  one  of  a  very  peculiai 
character,  and  will  doubtless  be  regarded  as  a  memorable  event 
in  the  history  of  this  country.  We  have  on  the  one  hand  Dr. 
Curtis,  the  Titular  Primate,  expressing  his  disapprobation  of 'he 
proceedings ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  has  the  Roman  Catholic 
Archbishop  of  Dublin  interfered  to  prevent  Mr.  Maguire  from 
attending  here  this  day  1  or  has  the  Roman  Catholic  Bishop  of 
Mr.  Maguire's  diocess  (Kilmore)  taken  any  notice  whatever  of 
the  extraordinary  circumstance  of  one  of  the  Clergy  disobey- 
ing the  wishes  of  the  Titular  Primate  1  Gentlemen,  it  appears^ 
that  neither  the  Roman  Catholic  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  nor  the 
Roman  Catholic  Bishop  of  Kilmore  has  interposed  their 
authority  in  the  business.   And  I  do  say  *iiat  by  their  silence  on 


10  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OP 

the  subject  they  Lave  given  an  indirect  sanction  to  the  proceed 
ing ;  for  they  possess  the  power  of  preventing  Mr.  Maguire 
from  attending,  and  that  power  they  have  not  exercised.  I 
beheve,  I  am  right,  in  stating  that  there  are  some  Roman  Catho- 
lic Clergymen  here  this  day.  I  hail  their  presence  amongst  us 
with  great  satisfaction,  as,  in  my  mind,  by  their  attendance,  they 
b.\m)  give  their  sanction  to  the  proceedings.  With  respect  to 
the  preliminaries,  I  have  one  observation  to  make — it  regards 
myself — it  is  thought  by  some,  that  I  possess  a  talent  for 
declamatory  speaking.  Supposing  this  to  be  the  case,  I  am  by 
thi)  arrangements  which  have  been  entered  into,  relative  to  the 
mode  in  which  the  discussion  is  to  be  conducted,  precluded  from 
availing  myself  of  any  advantage  which  this  talent,  if  I  possess 
it,  might  give  me — as  it  has  been  agreed  upon  that  neither  my 
reverend  opponent  nor  myself  shall  be  allowed  to  address  the 
meeting  for  longer  than  half  an  hour  at  a  time — my  soarings 
must  be  contracted — my  pinions  must  be  fettered  down.  It  is 
not  by  flights  of  fancy  or  poetical  allusions  that  this  meeting  is 
to  be  swayed — argument  is  the  only  weapon  that  can  be  wielded 
here  this  day.  We  must  be  governed  by  the  only  unerring 
standard, — the  word  of  God.  One  word  to  the  gentlemen  of 
the  public  Press — all  I  ask  is  justice — justice  alike  to  each  of 
us — let  our  principles  and  opinions  go  fairly  before  the  world — 
let  the  world  scrutinize  and  examine  them,  and  then  give  its 
verdict — I  shall  not  at  present  occupy  more  of  your  time. 

Mr.  Maguire  rose,  and  spoke  to  the  following  effect : — Gen- 
tlemen— As  my  friend,  Mr.  Pope,  has  entered  into  a  very  long 
narrative,  touching  the  circumstances  that  have  led  to  the  pre- 
sent discussion,  it  will  not  be  considered  egotism  in  me,  if  I  give 
you  a  brief  sketch  of  them,  as  far  as  they  regard  myself.  I 
happened,  last  November,  to  come  to  the  town  of  Carrick-on- 
Shannon,  on  private  business  of  importance,  and  I  solemnly 
assure  you,  that  I  was  not  aware,  until  I  arrived  in  Carrick,  that  a 
meeting  of  the  Catholics  of  Leitrim  was  about  to  be  held  there. 
I  was  pressed  by  a  few  particular  friends  to  remain  for  the  meet- 
ing which  was  fixed  for  the  next  day ;  and  on  attending  at  the 
meeting,  a  resolution  on  the  subject  of  education  was  pi)t  into 
my  hands  to  move.  In  doing  so,  I  prefaced  it  with  a  few 
observations,  and  I  distinctly  recollect  saying,  that  my  great 
objection  to  the  disputations  upon  the  indiscriminate  circulation  of 
the  Scriptures  was,  that  they  all  ended  in  a  wordy  war,  and  mis- 
erable speechifying.  I  objected  to  that  course,  and  I  said,  that 
on  the  •ocirary,  solid  argument,  logical  deduction,  and  close 
fighting  ibould  be  adopted.  I  went  on  to  say,  that  such  was  the 
course  I  Misftfl  determined  to  pursue  ;  and  that  wei'e  I  (you  vi  ill 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  11 

observe  that  my  expression  was  an  hypothetical  one)  to  meet  the 
arch-cr"sader  himself,  in  the  arena  of  polemical  disputation,  in- 
stead of  suffering  him  to  indulge  in  flights  of  fancy,  which  would 
only  obscure,  or  in  strains  of  eloquence  that  would  only  confuse, 
I  would  confme  him  to  a  few  solid  objections,  such  as  that 
respecting  the  Socinian,  which,  if  he  would  satisfactorily  solve  to 
me,  I  would  myself  consent  to  become  a  Biblical.  You  will 
observe  that  my  expression  was  put  hypothetically.  I  did  not 
say  that  I  would  meet  him,  but  that  tvei'e  I  to  meet  him,  I  would 
avoid  the  flights  of  fancy  and  speechifying,  and  confine  him  to 
a  few  solid  objections.  A  report  of  the  observations  which  I 
made  at  this  meeting  appeared  in  the  Weekly  Register,  and 
I  was  there  made  to  say  that  I  was  ready  to  meet  the  Popes, 
&c,  &c.  I  can  assure  this  assembly,  that  no  such  expression 
as  that  fell  from  me  on  that  occasion.  A  newspaper  controversy, 
the  necessary  consequence  of  a  misrepresentation  on  the 
part  of  Mr.  Pope,  ensued.  Mr.  Pope  addressed  a  long  letter 
to  me,  through  the  columns  of  the  Evening  JVLaiL  In  that 
letter  he  attempted  to  solve  the  objection  with  regard  to  the 
Socinian.  I  replied,  to  show  that  he  had  not  solved  that  question  ; 
and  I  trust,  before  this  polemical  conflict  is  over,  to  prove  to  you 
that  he  has  not  solved  it,  and  that  he  never  will.  With  regard 
to  what  he  has  said  about  the  Roman  Catholic  Primate  of  Ire* 
land,  it  would  have  been  more  dignified  in  Mr.  Pope  to  be  silen 
on  that  point. — I  avoided  hearing  or  seeing  any  thing  from  my 
own  Bishop,  Dr.  O'Reilly.  Since  I  came  to  Dubhn,  I  have 
not  received  any  communication  from  him,  verbal  or  written. — 
If  I  have  thus  come  forward  in  this  public  place,  and  on  this 
solemn  occasion,  I  have  not  done  so  until  I  have  been  repeatedly 
challenged  to  the  conflict.  A  number  of  persons  were  hired,  I 
know  not  by  whom,  and  sent  round  my  parish  with  green  bags 
containing  copies  of  the  challenge,  which  they  circulated  most 
industriously  in  every  possible  direction.  The  challenge  was 
put  into  every  cabin,  it  was  posted  upon  every  w^all  in  the  county. 
1  state  these  circumstances  to  you,  as  they  will  form  with 
you  some  excuse  for  the  appearance  here  this  day  of  a  man  who 
has  lived  amidst  the  bogs  of  Leitrim — a  man  who  has  been  the 
inhabitant  of  the  mountains,  and  who  never  before  addressed  an 
enhghtened  audience  like  the  present.  It  must  appear  to  you 
from  this  relation  of  facts,  that  it  was  no  overweening  desire  of 
notoriety  that  pressed  me  forward.  Over  me  Dr.  Curtis  and 
Dr.  Murray  exercise  no  direct  control ;  and  I  trust  that,  in  hold- 
ing a  conversation  in  this  public  room,  I  do  not  involve  myself 
in  a  breach  of  clerical  jurisdiction.  I  am  well  aware  that  the 
Roman  Catholic  Bishops  of  Ireland  never  will  recognize  the 
prin<^iple  of  public  discussions  upon  matters  of  rehgion  in  thia 


I»  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

country — disturbed  as  it  is  by  moral,  polemical,  and  political  dif- 
ferences and  conflicts.  I  disclaim,  I  deny,  with  uplifted  arms, 
any  thing  like  an  indirect  sanction  of  these  proceedings  on  the 
part  of  the  Cathohc  Prelates  as  mentioned  by  Mr.  Pope.  I  stand 
forward  here,  of  myself,  to  defend  my  religious  principles,  which 
have  grown  with  my  growth,  and  for  the  assertion  of  which  I 
am  ready,  if  called  upon,  to  lay  down  my  life.  These  princi- 
ples I  am  determined  to  maintain,  unless  indeed  Mr.  Pope  shall 
c  onvince  me  that  I  am  in  error.  If  I  be  convinced  that  I  am 
in  error,  I  am  ready  to  change  my  religious  opinions,  and  to 
adopt  whatever  creed  reason  might  in  that  case  point  out  as  pre- 
ferable to  my  own.  Having  stated  so  much  with  respect  to  the 
challenge,  I  have  a  few  words  to  say  with  respect  to  Dr.  Cur- 
tis. It  may  not  be  inappropriate  here  to  remark,  that  though  1 
am  independent  of  the  control  of  Dr.  Curtis,  the  Roman  Catholic 
Primate  of  all  Ireland,  I  am  ready  to  listen  to  any  advice 
emanating  from  him,  with  respect  and  dutiful  attention.  I  am 
well  aware  that  obedience  is  one  of  the  great  and  principal  duties 
of  the  Christian — I  know,  as  the  Apostle  has  it,  that  he  who 
refuses  to  obey  the  authorities  set  over  hini  by  Divine  Provi- 
dence resisteth  the  ordinances  of  God,  and  procureth  to  himself 
damnation.  I  would  not,  therefore,  disobey  my  superiors,  as,  in 
doing  so,  I  would  be  guilty  of  a  violation  of  moral  principle.  It 
may  not  be  out  of  place  for  me  to  mention  to  you  the  personal 
disad  vantages  under  which  I  labor  on  the  present  occasion.  Mr. 
Pope  is  an  old  practitioner  in  the  business  of  disputation.  He 
has  become,  by  habit,  eloquent  on  the  subject,  and  he  has  a  fatal 
facility  of  expressing  himself,  sufficient  to  make  any  cause  in 
his  hands  appear  plausible.  His  system  has  all  the  charms  of 
novelty  to  recommend  it — and  fashion,  we  all  know,  is  a  formid- 
able temptation.  He  has  arrayed  in  his  favor  worldly  power 
and  influence.  He  has,  besides,  all  the  saints  and  sinners  of 
modern  times,  whose  pride  and  self-interest  will  secure  him 
attentive  ears.  He  knows  how  to  estimate  the  value  of  such 
influence.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  it  has  any  weight  with  him 
in  {}  e  assertion  of  his  religious  principles.  I  solemnly  declare 
that  I  give  him  credit  for  sincerity.  But  I  have  one  complaint, 
and  a  serious  one,  to  make  against  him.  He  has  left  me  little 
or  no  ground  for  attack.  I  could  not  obtain  from  Mr.  Pope, 
without  difficulty,  a  profession  of  his  creed.  When  called  upon 
to  define  his  faith,  he  has  called  himself  a  Protestant.  Mr.  Pope 
protests  against  the  church  of  England — so  do  I.  He  protests 
against  the  church  of  Scotland — so  do  I.  Against  the  church 
in  Gevmany — so  do  I,  Against  the  Greek  church — so  do  I. 
Mr.  Pope,  in  fact  protests  against  every  church,  but,  in  a  more 
especial  and  particular  manner,  does  he  protect  against  the 


THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CHURCH.  13 

*•  errors"  of  Popery  ;  and  if  any  errors  do  exist  in  Popery,  I  am 
ready  to  protest  as  strongly  against  them  as  iVIr.  Pope.  So  far 
i  am  equally  a  Protestant  with  Mr.  Pope,  and  my  Protestantism 
goes  as  far  as  his,  consisting,  as  it  does,  in  a  simple  negation  of 
Popery,  if  it  be  understood  in  the  sense  in  which  Mr.  Pope 
would  exhibit  it.  On  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Pope  has  the  whole 
range  of  Roman  Catholicism,  whence  to  select  three  favorite 
charges  agaiijst  my  known  and  established  principles.  Where 
are  the  points  which  I  am  to  select  against  him  1  In  the  confes- 
sion of  faith  which  he  made  to  me,  he  admitted  the  doctrines  of 
the  Trinity,  the  Incarnation  and  Justification,  by  Faith  only. 
Now  there  is  not  one  of  those  principles  which  I  do  not  admit, 
except  the  word  "  only."  So  far  it  is  difficult  for  me  to  select 
three  principal  charges  against  him.  It  is  true  that  Mr.  Pope 
has  volunteered  to  defend  two  points  which  he  does  not  entirely 
and  undoubtedly  believe,  but  which  he  has  the  kindness  to  sup 
port  against  me.  I  have  a  few  preliminary  observations  to  offer 
to  you  regarding  the  scriptural  proofs  of  the  existence  of  an 
infallible  church.  Mr.  Pope  is  not  the  advocate  of  any  church. 
I  avow  myself  the  child  and  champion  of  an  infallible  church. 
It  remains  for  you  to  see  whether  the  motives  of  credibility 
which  attach  me  to  that  church  are  defensible — it  remains  for 
you  to  judge  whether  the  doctrine,  that  Christ  established  a 
church  upon  earth,  and  endowed  it  with  infallibility,  be  grounded 
upon  scripture — be  consistent  with  the  primitive  faith  of  Chris- 
tianity— be  agreeable  to  common  reason  and  common  sense.  It 
is  p-asy  to  perceive,  that  he  who  denies  the  necessity  of  bending 
to  a  spiritual  authority,  is  establishing  a  principle  latitudinarian 
and  revolutionary  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  words.  If  there 
exist  no  spiritual  authority  upon  earth,  to  which  man  is  to  yield 
obedience,  I  assert  that  every  act  of  rebellion  against  the  church 
and  against  the  state  is  the  admitted  and  unqualified  right  of 
every  inoividual.  If  the  principle  of  private  judgment  be  founded 
upon  the  law  of  nature,  or  upon  the  positive  law  of  God, 
there  can  be  no  limitation  of  the  right.  The  law  has  made  no 
exception,  consequently  every  individual  has  a  right  (and  there 
is  no  exception,  either  in  religious  or  political  matters)  to  set  up 
his  private  judgment  against  the  laws  of  the  church  and  of  the 
community.  It  was  such  principles  that  caused  thp  revolution 
in  England,  and  brought  a  king  to  the  block.  To  similar  prin- 
ciples we  are  to  attribute  the  bloody  scenes  of  the  desolating 
revolution  m  France.  Such  principles  have  involved  Germany 
in  the  darkest  Atheism.  I  nold  in  my  hand  the  work  of  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Rose,  dedicated  to  the  Bishop  of  Chester,  in  which 
he  laments  the  state  of  the  churches  in  Germany,  with  the 
pathos  of  a  Jeremy — he  describes  them  as  plunged  in  the  darkest 


14  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

Atheism.  Every  thing  in  the  scripture  is  explained  away  there, 
and  the  test  of  natural  philosophy  is  absurdly  applied  to  the  mira- 
cles of  our  Redeemer.  If  the  principle  of  private  judgment  be 
once  recognized,  then  had  the  heretics  of  former  days,  Arius, 
Cerinthus,  Manicheus,  &c,  as  good  a  right  to  the  exercise  of 
private  judgment  as  Mr.  Pope,  or  any  gentleman  of  the  19th 
century.  If  those  heretics  had  a  right  to  exercise  it,  upon  what 
principle  did  the  Catholic  church  condemn  them — cut  them  off 
as  rotten  members,  and  treat  them,  as  Christ  said  those  shall  be 
treated  who  would  not  hear  the  church,  as  heathens  and  pub- 
licans, and  reprobates  upon  the  earth?  Mr.  Pope,  I  suppose, 
recognizes  the  first  four  councils,  and  the  Athanasian  creed — he 
must  then  admit  that  the  church  had  a  right  to  condemn  Arius, 
Eutyches,  and  Manicheus,  and  every  other  heretic  and  heresy 
that  appeared  for  the  first  four  centuries  of  the  Christian  aira. 
If  he  acknowledged  the  power  in  the  church  to  condemn  heresy 
in  the  first  century,  why  not  acknowledge  it  now?  Gentlemen, 
I  am  about  to  enter  upon  my  proofs  of  the  authority  of  the  Catho- 
lic church.  Mr.  Pope's  rules  of  faith  will  be  amply  discussed 
hereafter,  hut  now  you  are  about  to  hear,  what,  to  some  of  you 
may  appear  the  antiquated  doctrine  of  church  authority,  which 
hos  been  discarded  by  modern  Reformers  for  the  last  300  years. 

Mr.  Pope. — I  beg  to  call  upon  Mr.  Maguire  for  proofs  of 
the  InfaUibility  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

Mr.  Macuire. — I  shall  make  a  few  preliminary  observations 
before  I  directly  enter  upon  the  subject.  If  the  unlimited  right 
of  private  judgment  be  recognised,  then  will  a  seven-fold  shield 
be  thrown  over  every  error,  however  impure — every  heresy, 
howevei*  damnable — every  folly,  however  ridiculous.  It  will  be 
the  origin  of  every  species  of  madness,  violence,  and  fanati- 
cism. What  will  each  of  the  heretics  say  ?  "I  exercise  my 
judgment  conscientiously  and  to  the  best  of  my  ability — I  have 
prayed  to  God  that  he  might  enlighten  me  with  his  grace.  I 
have  taken  every  means  in  my  power  to  arrive  at  the  truth,  and 
my  decided  conviction  now  is  that  Christ  is  not  the  Son  of 
God."  Thus  would  Arianism,  that  heresy  which  distracted  the 
church  of  Christ,  and  which,  if  the  protecting  influence  of  the 
Almighty  had  not  been  extended  to  his  church,  would  have 
eradicated  every  Christian  principle,  and  sapped  the  foundation 
of  that  heavenly  and  noble  edifice,  become  justifiable.  How 
could  Mr.  Pope  blame  the  Arian  ?  Mr.  Pope  would  appeal  U 
the  scriptures — but  in  vain  he  would  appeal  to  the  scriptures 
against  the  obstinate  Arian  or  Socinian.  They  would  in  reply 
appeal  to  their  cpnscience — they  will  say  that  they  have  read 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  15 

the  scriptures,  and  that  they  have  as  good  a  right  to  interpret 
their  meaning  as  Mr.  Pope.  Can  Mr.  Pope,  who  recognizes 
the  principle  of  gospel  liberty,  blame  them  for  their  conduct? 
Will  he,  in  this  regard,  violate  that  principle  which  is  the  boast 
of  the  Reformation?  Who  is  to  judge  between  Mr.  Pope  and 
the  Socinian  or  Arian  ?  God  alone  can  be  their  judge,  and 
that  not  till  the  soul  is  separated  from  the  body.  Mr.  Pope  has 
called  upon  me  for  proofs  of  the  infaUibility  of  the  church  of 
Rome.  I  beseech  you,  gentlemen,  for  the  tender  mercies  of 
God,  as  far  as  in  you  lies,  to  divest  yourselves  of  every  feeling, 
of  every  prejudice,  of  every  prepossession  in  favor  of  your  own 
opinions  that  have  been  dear  to  you,  and  to  weigh  in  the  honest 
balance  of  sincerity  the  principles  which  I  shall  lay  down,  and 
which  I  shall  invariably  found  upon  text«s  of  scripture,  and  upon 
the  authority  established  in  the  church  for  the  first  five  ages  of 
Christianity.  I  assure  you  I  do  hope,  with  the  blessing  of 
heaven,  and  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  make  some 
converts.  I  am  serious,  believe  me.  Protestants  are  not  in 
the  habit  of  examining  the  Roman  Catholic  religion.  The  very 
name  of  Popery  is  sufficient  to  frighten  them — the  basilisk  does 
not  appear  half  so  dangerous  in  their  eyes  as  Popery.  And  for 
my  part  I  should  not  wonder  at  their  thinking  so,  if  Popery 
really  were  what  they  have  been  taught  to  believe  it  is.  It  is 
incumbent  on  you  then  to  commence  an  examination  of  the 
tenets  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion.  The  first  text  to  which 
I  shall  refer  you,  is  taken  from  Isaiah,  hx,  21.  It  is  admitted 
.  by  Protestants,  that  the  inspired  writer  in  this  passage  spoke  of 
the  church  that  was  to  come. 

"  This  is  my  covenant  with  them,  saith  the  Lord ;  my  spirit  that  is  in  thee, 
and  my  words  that  I  have  put  into  thy  mouth,  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy 
mouth,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed's 
seed,  saith  the  Lord,  from  henceforth  and  for  ever." 

But  I  need  not  dwell  at  length  upon  this  text,  as  I  am  fur- 
nished with  several  strong  and  conclusive  texts  in  the  New 
Testament. 

"  As  the  Father  has  sent  me,  I  also  send  you,"  says  the  Lord,  addressing 
his  Apostles.  Again — "  All  power  is  given  to  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth ; 
go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you  :  and  lo  !  I  am  with  you  all  days 
even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world." — Matthew,  xxviii,  18, 19,  20. 

Christ  here  declares,  that  the  same  power  given  to  him  by 
the  Father  he  commimicates  to  his  Apostles  without  limitation, 
moral  or  personal.  It  is  a  maxim  in  ethics,  Uhi  lex  non  dis- 
tinguit,  nee  nos  distinguere  debemus.  The  Father  conferred 
upon  Christ  infallibility,  and  here  he  directly  communicates  all 
his  power  to  the  Apostles.     Perhaps  it  will  be  said,  that  it 


16  THE     INFALLIBILITY    OF 

rested  there,  and  was  to  cease  with  the  lives  of  the  Apostles 
Christ  declares  the  contrary,  for  he  adds, 

"  Lo !  1  am  with  you  all  days,  even  to  the  consummation  of  tlie  world." 

Were  the  Apostles  to  live  for  ever,  or  rather  was  not  this 
power  to  be  communicated  to  their  representatives  on  earth, 
in  whose  persons  they  would  morally  live  for  ever  1  St.  Paul 
w  iting  to  Timothy  says, 

"  The  church  of  the  living  God,  is  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  truth." — 
iii.  15. 

Again,  our  Saviour  says, 

"  He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me,  and  he  that  despiseth  you,  despiseth 
me,  and  he  that  despiseth  me,  despiseth  Him  that  sent  me." — Luke  x,  16. 

Also  St.  John,  iv,  6. 

"  He  that  knoweth  God,  heareth  us,  he  that  is  not  of  God,  heareth  us  not, 
oy  this  we  know  the  spirit  of  truth,  and  the  spirit  of  error." 

Therefore,  those  who  did  not  hear  the  Aiposiles  preaching  and 
instructing,  were  branded  with  the  mark  of  the  spirit  of  error 
In  Mark,  xvi,  15,  16,  we  read, 

"  He  saith  unto  them.  Go  ye  into  the  whole  world,  and  preach  the  gospel 
to  every  creature.  He  that  beheveth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved  j  but  he 
that  believeth  not,  shall  be  condemned." 

Is  there,  I  would  ask,  any  thing  like  a  commandment  here  to 
give  the  scriptures  to  every  man,  woman,  and  child,  and  let 
hem  interpret  them  as  they  might  please  ? — No. — But  if  "  he 
will  not  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen  and 
the  publican." 

I  ask  you,  in  the  sincerity  of  your  hearts,  do  you  think  that 
Christ  would  thus  bind  mankind  in  obedience  to  an  authority, 
which  could  lead  them  into  damnable  error?  Our  Lord  says 
emphatically,  and  without  limitation  or  exception,  "  he  that 
will  not  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen  and 
the  publican." 

This,  no  doubt,  will  appear  a  novel  doctrine  to  many  of  my 
hearers,  who  have  been  taught  to  recognize  no  authority  in  any 
church,  and  who  have  long  worshipped  the  idol  of  private 
judgment.     Again  we  read  in  Hebrews,  xiii,  17, 

"  Obey  your  Prelates,  for  they  watch  as  being  to  render  an  account  of 
your  souls." 

I  am  at  a  loss  to  discover  how  the  Prelates  would  be  obliged 
to  render  an  account  of  our  souls  if  it  be  not  our  duty  to  obey 
them  ;  but  if,  on  the  contrary,  we  may  read  the  scriptures  and 
interpret  them  at  our  own  risk,  must  it  follow  in  that  case,  as  a 
Decessary  consequence,  that  the  Bishops,  to  whom  we  acknow- 


THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CHURCH.  17 

ledge  no  obedience,  shall  be  ace  )untable  for  the  salvation  ci 

our  souls  1 
**  Oh !  Israel,  Israel,  destruction  is  thy  own — thy  help  is  only  in  me." 
How  can  the  Bishops  be  accountable  for  our  souls,  if  we  do 

not  make  them  our  spiritual  guides?     I  could  quote  twenty 

additional  passages  from  scripture  in  support  of  the  doctrine 

which  I  advocate,  as — 

'*  Ye  are  the  Hght  of  the  world" — "  ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth" — "  what* 
soever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,"  &c. 

I  ask  you,  in  the  unaffected  sincerity  of  a  Christian  heart,  if 
Christ  did  not  intend  to  bind  mankind  in  obedience  to  hia 
Church,  is  it  not  astonishing  that  he  should  have  put  forward  in 
so  many  and  such  clear  texts  of  scripture,  the  authority  of  that 
church  ?  I  challenge  Mr.  Pope  to  show  me  a  single  dogma  in 
the  Christian  dispensation  more  clearly  revealed  in  scripture. 
I  affirm  that  he  could  not  prove  the  divinity  of  Christ  upon  texts 
so  clear — that  cardinal  dogma  of  Christianity  is  not  established 
upon  texts  so  plain,  so  natural,  and  so  obvious.  The  Homihes 
of  the  church  of  England  tell  us  that  for  upwards  of  800  years, 
"  all  Christendom  was  involved  in  damnable  idolatry  and 
error."  Could  Christ  himself  leave  hundreds  of  millions  of 
men  for  900  years  in  error  1  I  ask — would  he  lead  us  into  the 
beUef  of  an  infallible  church,  possessing  not  infallibility  ?  Hav- 
ing said  so  much  upon  the  subject  of  infallibility,  let  me  now 
^ive  you  the  belief  of  the  first  ages  of  the  church  which  are 
admitted  by  all  Protestants,  and  even  by  Luther  himself  to  have 
taught  the  truth,  and  to  have  been  pure  in  doctrine.  The 
quotations  which  I  shall  here  make  from  the  Holy  Fathers  will 
go  before  the  learned  world — I  will  tell  the  page  and  the  book 
m  which  they  will  be  found — I  have  myself,  in  seven  instances, 
consulted  the  originals,  and  finding  them  so  correct,  I  can 
vouch  for  the  accuracy  of  the  other  quotations.  The  first 
authority  which  I  shall  quote  is  Irenaeus,  a  father  of  the  Latin 
church,  who  lived  in  the  second  century.  He  was  by  birth  a 
Greek,  and  his  work  in  the  original  is  lost,  but  a  Latin  transla- 
tion has  been  preserved. 

"  Things  being  made  thus  plain  (he  is  alluding  to  the  derivation  of  doc- 
trine from  the  Apostles,)  it  is  not  from  others  that  truth  is  to  be  sought, 
which  is  easily  learned  from  the  Church,  (or  in  the  words  of  the  original — 
quam  facile  est  ah  ecclesia  sumere,)  For  to  this  church  (he  continues)  as 
into  a  rich  repository,  the  Apostles  committed  whatever  is  divine  truth  ;  that 
each  one,  if  so  inclined,  might  thence  draw  the  drink  of  life.  This  is  the 
loay  of  life;  all  other  teachers  must  be  shunned  as  thieves  and  robbers.  For 
what?  Should  there  be  any  dispute  on  a  point  of  small  moment,  must  not 
recourse  be  had  to  the  most  ancient  churches,  where  the  Apostles  resided, 
and  from  them  collect  the  truth  ?" — J  Iv.  Herts,  lib.  iii  cap,  iv,  page  20^ 
EkL  Oxonii.  1702. 

2* 


18  THE     INFALLIBILITY     OF 

And  again.  "It  is  a  duty  to  obey  the  Priests  of  the  church — eis  qui  in 
ecelesia  sunt  Presbyteri,  obedire  oportet— who  bold  their  succession  from  the 
Apostles,  and  who  with  that  succession,  received  agreeably  to  the  will  of  the 
Father,  the  sure  pledge  of  truth,  {Charisima  veritatis  certum;)  but  as  to  those 
who  belong  not  to  that  leading  succession  they  may  be  united,  they  should 
be  suspected,  either  as  heretics  or  schismatics,  proudly  extolling  and  pleasing 
themselves,  or  as  hypocrites,  actuated  by  vain  glory  or  the  love  of  lucre. 
But  they  who  impugn  the  truth,  and  excite  others  to  oppose  the  church  of 
God,  their  fate  is  with  Dathan  and  Abiron ;  while  schismatics  who  violate 
the  church  unity — qui  scindunt  et  separant  unitatem  ecclesice — experience  the 
puni?iment  which  fell  on  King  Jeroboam." 

My  next  authority  is  St.  Clement,  of  Alexandria,  Lib.  stro- 
matwrij  Book  vii,  page  883,  Oxford  edition.  He  was  a  Greek 
Father,  and  Master  of  the  School  of  Alexandria.  He  lived  in 
the  second  century. 

"  Those  who  seek  may  find  the  truth,  and  clearly  learn  from  the  scrip- 
tures themselves,  in  what  manner  heretics  have  gone  astray,  and  on  the 
contrary,  in  what  manner  accurate  knowledge  and  the  right  doctrine  are  to  be 
found  in  the  true  and  aricient  Church  only.  He  ceases  to  be  faithful  to  the 
Lord,  who  revolts  against  the  received  doctrines  of  the  Church,  to  embrace 
the  opinions  of  heretics.  Heretics  make  use,  indeed,  of  the  scriptures  j  but 
then  they  use  not  all  the  sacred  books  ;  those  they  use  are  corrupted,  or  they 
chiefly  urge  ambiguous  passages.  They  corrupt  those  truths  which  agree 
with  the  inspired  word,  and  were  delivered  by  the  holy  Apostles  and  teachers, 
opposing  the  divine  tradition  by  human  doctrines,  that  they  may  establish 
their  heresy. — But  it  is  clear  from  what  has  been  said,  that  there  is  only  one 
true  Church,  which  alone  is  ancient,  and  there  is  but  one  God  and  one 
Lord." 

Tertullian,  who  flourished  in  the  end  of  the  second  century, 
and  was  a  citizen  of  Carthage,  in  his  book  De  Prescript,  cap. 
6,  page  331.     Edit.  Pamelliana,  1662,  says, — 

"  We  are  not  allowed  to  indulge  our  own  humour,  nor  to  choose  what 
another  has  invented.  We  have  the  Apostles  of  our  Lord  as  founders,  who 
were  not  themselves  the  inventors  nor  authors  of  what  they  left  us  ;  but  they 
have  faithfully  taught  the  world  that  doctrine  which  they  received  from 
Christ," 

Ibidem,  cap.  21."  Now  to  know  what  the  Apostles  taught — that  is,  what 
Christ  revealed  to  them,  recourse  must  be  had  to  the  Churches  which  they 
founded,  and  which  they  instructed  by  word  of  mouth,  and  by  their  Epistles, 
For  it  is  plain,  that  all  doctrine  which  is  conformable  to  the  faith  of  these 
mother  Churches  is  true,  being  that  which  they  received  from  the  Apostles, 
the  Apostles  from  Christ,  Christ  from  God ;  and  that  all  other  opinions  must 
be  novel  and/aZse." 

Century  the  Third. — Origen  in  his  preface  to  the  first 
book  of  his  Periarchon,  page  47,  writes, — 

"  As  there  are  many  who  think  they  believe  what  Christ  taught,  and  some 
of  these  differ  from  others,  it  becomes  necessary  that  all  should  profess  that 
doctrine,  which  came  down  from  the  Apostles,  and  now  continues  in  the 
Church  [usque  ad  presens  in  ecelesia  permanens.)  That  alone  is  truth  which 
in  nothing  differs  from  what  has  been  thus  delivered.  {Q,u(B  in  nvlh  ah 
ecclesiastica  et  apostolica  discordat  traditione.^^) 


THE    ROMAN    CATHDLIC    CHURCH.  19 

And  homLj  the  6th,  on  Leviticus  : —  » 

"  Let  him  look  to  it,  who  arrogantly  puffed  up,  contemns  the  apostolic 
words.  To  me  it  is  good  to  adhere  to  apostolic  men,  as  to  God  and  his 
Christ,  and  to  draw  intelligence  from  the  Scriptures,  according  to  the  sense, 
that  has  been  delivered  by  them.  If  we  follow  the  mere  letter  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  take  the  interpretation  of  the  law,  as  the  Jews  commonly  explain 
it,  I  shall  blush  to  confess  that  the  Lord  should  give  such  law.  But  if  the 
law  of  God  be  understood  as  the  Church  teaches,  then  only  does  it  transcend 
all  human  law,  and  is  worthy  of  him  that  gave  it" 

And  again,  Tract  29,  on  Matthew,  tome  3,  page  864 : 
"As  often  as  heretics  produce  the  canonical  Scripture,  in  which  every 
Christian  agrees  and  believes,  they  seem  to  say,  *  Lo !  with  us  is  the  word 
of  truth.'  But  to  them  (the  heretics)  we  cannot  give  credit,  nor  depart  from 
the  first  and  ecclesiastical  tradition :  we  can  beheve  only  as  the  succeeding 
churches  of  God  have  delivered." 

I  may  observe,  there  is  only  a  translation  of  Origen's  works 
in  the  Latin  remaining,  except  a  few  fragments  of  the  original 
Greek.  St.  Cyprian,  bishop  and  martyr,  in  his  treatise  De 
Unitate  Ecclesiae,  observes  : — 

"  Men  are  exposed  to  error,  because  they  turn  not  their  eyes  to  the  foun- 
tain of  truth,  nor  is  the  head  sought  for,  nor  the  doctrine  of  the  heavenly 
Father  upheld,  which  things  would  any  one  seriouslv  weigh,  no  long  arguing 
would  be  necessary.  The  proof  is  easy — Christ  addresses  Peter,  '  I  say  to 
thee,  thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,  and  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it.*  He  that  does  not  hold  this  unity  of  the 
Church,  can  he  think  that  he  holds  the  faith?  He  that  opposes  and  with- 
stands the  Church,  can  he  trust  that  he  is  in  the  Church  ?" — Page  108,  &c." 

And  in  his  66th  Epistle,  page  166,  Oxford  Edition  : — 

"Christ  says  to  his  Apostles,  and  through  them  to  all  his  ministers,  who 
by  a  regular  ordination  succeed  to  them, — *  He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me, 
and  he  that  despiseth  you,  despiseth  me.'  (Luke  x.  16.)  And  thence  have 
schisms  and  heresies  arisen,  when  the  bishop  who  is  one,  and  presides  over 
the  Church,  is  proudly  despised — Dum  Episcopus  qui  unus  est,  et  Ecclesicz 
prccst,  contemniturJ'* 

Century  the  Fourth. — Lactantius,  a  convert  to  the 
Christian  religion,  the  most  accomphshed  scholar  of  the  age, 
and  tutor  to  Crispus,  the  emperor  Constantine's  son,  and  who 
was  styled  "  the  Christian  Cicero," — In  the  fourth  book  of  his 
Institutions,  c.  30,  p.  232,  Cambridge  edition,  thus  speaks  : 

"  The  Catholic  Church  alone  retains  the  true  worship — this  is  the  source 
of  truth — this  is  the  dwelling  of  faith — this  the  temple  of  God,  into  which  he 
that  enters  not,  and  from  which  he  that  goes  out,  forfeits  the  hope  of  life,  and 
of  eternal  salvation — a  spe  vit(Z  ac  salutis  eterncR  cdienus  est.^^ 

Eusebius  of  Palestine,  in  his  Prccmium  de  Eccles.  TheoL 
page  60,  Ed.  Colon.  1687: 

"  To  what  has  been  mentioned,  I  shall  add  my  reasonmg  on  the  divinity 
of  our  Saviour ;  but  nothing  newly  invented  from  myself;  nothing  From  my 
own  closet,  nor  resting  on  the  opinion  of  my  own  sagacity.  I  shall  deliver 
the  uncorrupted  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  God,  which  once  received  from 
^^r  and  eye  witnesses,  this  chuivh  preserves  inviolate." 


20  TH£    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

St  Athanasius,  Patriarch  of  Alexandria,  first  Epist,  ad  Sera* 
f/wm,  p.  676,  Ed.  Bened.  1698: 

"  Let  us  again  consider  from  the  earliest  period,  the  tradition,  the  doctrine, 
and  faith  of  the  Catholic  church  which  God  first  ddivered,  which  the  Apostles 
proclaimed,  and  the  succeeding  Fathers  fostered  and  preserved.  On  these 
authorities  the  church  is  founded,  and  whoever  falls  from  her  communion 
neither  is,  nor  can  be  called  a  Christian." 

Epist.  ad  Marcell.  9,  1,  p.  996,  Ed.  Bened.  1698 : 
"  If  you  wish  to  confound  the  opinions  of  the  Gentiles  and  of  tlie  heretics, 
»nd  to  shew  that  the  knowledge  of  God  is  not  to  be  found  with  them,  but  in 
the  church  alone,  you  may  repeat  the  words  of  the  79th  psalm." 

St.  Hilary,  in  his  Commentary  on  Matthew,  c.  xvii,  p.  675, 
Ed.  Bened : 

"Christ  (teaching  from  the  ship)  intimates,  that  they  who  are  out  of  the 
church  can  possess  no  understandmg  of  the  divine  word.  For  the  ship  is  an 
emblem  of  the  church,  within  which,  as  the  word  of  life  is  planted  and 
preached,  so  they  who  are  without,  being  as  barren  and  useless  sands,  can- 
not understand  it." 

St.  Basil  the  Great,  Bishop  of  Csesarea,  in  Cappadocia,  Lib. 
de  Spirit.  Sanct.  chap,  xvi,  t.  3,  p.  34 : 

"The  order  and  government  of  the  church,  is  it  not  manifestly  and  beyond 
contradiction  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost?  For  he  gave  to  his  church — first, 
apostles ;  secondly,  prophets  ;  thirdly,  teachers,"  &c. — 1  Cor.  xii,  28. 

St.  Ephrem  of  Edessa,  whose  works  were  published  in  Latin 
Dy  Gerard  Yesius,  at  Rome,  and  in  Greek  by  Thwaites,  at 
Oxford,  and  who  was  the  disciple  of  St.  James,  Bishop  of 
Nissibis  in  Mesopotamia,  Sermon  25 — Adv.  Heres.  t.  4,  p, 
499— Edit.  Quirini— Romse,  2740  : 

"  They  again  must  be  reproved,  who  wander  from  the  road,  to  run  into 
uncertain  and  devious  tracks;  for  the  way  of  salvation  holds  out  certain 
marks  by  which  you  may  learn  that  this  is  the  path  which  the  Messenger  of 
Peace  trod  ;  while  the  wise  whom  the  Holy  Spirit  instructed  walked  over ; 
and  the  Prophets  and  Apostles  pointed  out  to  us.  My  brethren  let  us  walk 
in  this  way  by  which  his  divine  Son  travelled.  This  is  the  royal  road  which 
leads  us  to  happiness." 

St.  Cyril,  patriarch  of  Jerusalem: 

"  The  church  is  called  Catholic  because  it  teaches  Catholicly,  and  with- 
out any  omission,  all  points  that  men  should  know  concerning  things  visible 
and  invisible,  heavenly  and  earthly." — Catechism,  18,  No.  2,  page  270. 

Ibidem,  Cat.  4,  No.  20. — "Learn  sedulously  from  the  church,  which  are 
the  books  of  the  Old  and  J^eio  Testament.'''' 

Ibidem,  Cat.  5,  No.  7. — "  Guard  the  faith,  and  that  faith  alone  which  ia 
now  delivered  to  thee  by  the  church,  confirmed  as  it  is  by  all  the  scriptures." 

Mr.  Pope  rose  and  said — Gentlemen,  I  find  it  necessary,  in 
consequence  of  an  observation  which  fell  from  Mr.  Maguiro 
towards  the  conclusion  of  his  first  speech,  to  give  the  following 
statement  relative  to  my  confession  of  faith.  I  shall  read  for 
you  a  document,  which  was  handed  to  Mr.  Maguire,  w'thout 
the  slightest  hesitation  by  Mr.  Singer  : 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  21 

"I  do  not  stand  forward  as  the  advocate  of  any  particular  church,  but  of 
the  great  leading  doctrines  held  in  common  by  the  reformed  churches,  a3 
contained  in  their  pubhshed  creeds,  and  as  an  opposer  of  the  tenets  of  tiie 
church  of  Rome,  against  which  they  in  common  protest. 

"  Our  controversy  is  not  about  church -government,  but  about  doctrines. 

"  I  hold  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

"The  sufficiency  of  the  scriptures  to  salvation,  the  Apocrypha  having 
been  rejected. 

"  The  utter  depravity  of  human  nature,  and  tho*necessity  of  a  change  of 
hfjart,  before  the  soul  can  be  admitted  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

"The  guilt  and  condemnation  of  man,  and  justification  before  God  by 
faith  alone,  in  the  finished  work  of  Christ. 

"  That  good  works  spring  out  necessarily  of  a  true  and  lively  faith. 

"  I  protest  against  Infallibility ;  doctrine  of  Supererogation  ;  Human 
Merit ;  Transubstantiation ;  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass ;  Service  in  an 
unknown  tongue ;  Communion  in  one  kind ;  Adoration  of  Images ;  and 
Invocation  of  Saints  and  Angels." 

While  I  acknowledge  to  Mr.  Maguire,  that  I  could  not  sub- 
scribe to  every  one  of  the  39  articles,  I  beg  to  refer  to  the 
following  articles,  as  a  further  exposition  of  my  faith, — articles 
1,  2,  4,  5,  6,  7,  9,  10,  11,  12,  13,  14,  15,  16,  17,  18,  and  all 
the  protestations  against  the  church  of  Rome,  contained  in  the 
other  articles.  Those  are  the  principles  which  every  real 
Protestant  professes,  and  to  them  I  most  cordially  subscribe. 

My  friend  has  complained,  that  he  has  discovered  no  tangible 
matter  on  which  to  oppose  me.  Mr.  Maguire  should  remem- 
ber, that  we  accuse  the  church  of  Rome  of  overwhelming  the 
whole  structure  of  Christianity,  by  the  addition  of  novel 
opinions  ;  and,  therefore,  he  cannot  find  fault  with  me,  if  my 
profession  of  faith  is  contained  within  a  much  shorter  compass 
than  his.  Mr.  Maguire  has  touched  upon  some  subjects, 
amongst  others,  the  right  of  private  judgment,  which  by  oui 
arrangements  were  not  to  come  under  consideration  until  a 
future  day — I  shall  not  follow  him  in  his  wanderings,  but  shall 
at  once  proceed  to  the  subject  more  immediately  before  us — 
the  proofs  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church. 
My  learned  friend  has  endeavored  to  prove  his  point,  by  bring- 
ing forward  various  passages  of  scripture,  which  he,  no  doubt, 
looked  upon  as  proofs.  But  I  charge  him  at  once  with  a 
"  petilio  principii,^^  and  maintain  that  the  onus  rests  on  him  of 
proving  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  the  church  of  Christ. 
Until  he  shall  bring  forward  proofs  to  demonstrate  this,  the 
passages  which  he  has  adduced  relative  to  the  church  of  Christ 
are  irrelevant.  My  learned  friend  has  also  brought  forward 
various  quotations  from  the  Fathers.  While  I  admit,  that  as 
historians  and  witnesses  of  what  may  have  occurred  in  the 
times  during  which  they  lived,  we  may  receive  the  testimony  of 
the  Fathers  ;  yet  I  do  say,  we  are  not  to  place  any  great  weight 
upon  their  authority — and  I  contend  for  it,  that  we  are  only  to 


22  THE    INTALLIBILITY    OF 

receive  their  expositions,  when  those  expositions  approve  them- 
selves to  our  judgments,  as  in  accordance  with  the  general 
tenor  of  the  sacred  scriptures.  Having  made  these  general 
remarks  upon  the  Fathers,  I  beg  to  read  the  advice  given 
by  St.  Augustin  and  Chrysostom,  which,  perchance,  may  assist 
Mr.  Maguire  in  deciding,  whether  the  church  of  Rome  be  the 
church  of  Christ.  From  St.  Augustin,  "Z>5  Unitaie  Ecclesicp,'^ 
cap.  16,  I  read  as  follows.     Speaking  of  the  Donatists  : — 

"  Let  them,"  he  says,  "if  they  can  demonstrate  their  church  not  by  the  talk 
and  rumor  of  the  Africans  ;  not  by  the  Councils  of  their  own  Bishops ;  not 
by  the  books  of  their  disputers ;  not  by  deceitful  miracles,  against  which  we 
tre  cautioned  by  the  word  of  God,  but  in  the  prescript  of  the  law,  in  the 
predictions  of  the  Prophets,  in  the  verses  of  the  Psalms,  in  the  voice  of  the 
Shepherd  himself,  in  the  preaching  and  works  of  the  Evangelists  ;  that  is,  in 
all  canonical  authorities  of  the  sacred  scriptures." 

St.  Chrysostom  also : 

"  Formerly  pL  might  have  been  ascertained  by  various  means,  which  was 
•Jie  true  church,  but  at  present  there  is  no  other  means  left  for 

THOSE  WHO  ARE  WILLING  TO  DISCOVER    THE    TRUE    CHURCH  OF  ChRIST  BUT 

BY  THE  SCRIPTURES  ALONE.  And  why  ?  BccausG  heresy  has  all  outward 
observances  in  common  with  her.  If  a  man,  therefore,  be  desirous  of  know- 
ing the  true  Church,  how  will  he  be  able  to  do  it  amidst  so  great  a  resem- 
blance, but  by  the  scriptures  alone?  Wherefore,  our  Lord  foreseeing  that 
such  a  great  confusion  of  things  would  take  place  in  the  latter  days,  ordered 
the  Christians  to  have  recourse  to  nothing  but  the  scriptures." — Horn.  49,  in 
f.!latL  xxiv. 

From  these  quotations,  you  will  perceive,  that  much  of  the 
controversy  resolves  itself  into  this  simple  question — Are  the 
doctrines  of  the  church  of  Rome  those  which  the  Bible  teaches  1 
How  then  are  we  to  know  this  but  from  the  Bible  ?  We  must 
first  then  be  in  possession  of  the  doctrines  of  the  church  of 
Christ,  in  order  to  determine,  whether  the  church  of  Rome  be 
the  church  of  Christ — and  then,  forsooth,  we  must  go  back  to 
the  church  of  Rome,  in  order  to  learn  what  the  doctrines  of  the 
church  of  Christ  are  ? 

Methinks,  my  friend  should  have  given  some  definition  of 
"  The  Church." — He  should  have  stated,  where  the  infallibility 
of  the  church  is  lodged.  Whether  in  a  general  council,  inde- 
pendently of  the  Pope,  or  whether  in  the  Pope  independently  of 
a  general  council — whether  in  a  council  and  the  Pope  together 
— or  in  the  universal  church  dispersed  throughout  the  world — 
for  if  I  know  not  where  this  infallibility  lies,  even  supposing 
that  it  did  exist,  of  what  possible  use  can  it  be  to  me  ?  I  assert, 
that  there  is  not  a  single  passage  throughout  the  entire  scrip- 
tures, in  which  the  word  "church"  means  the  body  of  the  eccle- 
siastical oflScers  exclusive  of  the  Christian  congregations  over 
which  they  preside.  The  word  church  occurs  in  about  ninety 
places  in  the  New  Testament  •  and  there  is  not  one,  in  which  it 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  23 

19  to  be  understood  of  the  ecclesiastical  governors  of  the  church, 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  people  under  their  charge. 

We  shall  see  the  oprnions  of  the  Fathers  on  the  meaning  of 
the  word  church.  St.  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  calls  the  church 
a  congregation  of  the  elect. — {Strom,  7,  p.  715.)  In  the  same 
sense  it  is  used  by  St.  Ignatius,  by  Critopalus,  by  St.  Cyril  of 
Alexandria,  by  Isidore  Pelusiota,  (Ig.  ad  Trail  Crit.  in  Confess, 
Fid.  c.  7.  Cyril,  in  cap.  42,  les.  p.  64.  Isid.  ep.  246,  1.  2,  p. 
236,)  and  others,  lobius  Monachus  says,  that  "  the  people 
believing  in  God  constitute  the  church." — (In  Bib.  Phot.  Cod. 
122,  p.  636.)  To  nearly  the  same  effect  speaks  St.  Basil, 
Theophylact,  (Basil  ep.  393.  Theoph.  in  1  ad  Cor.  c.  1,  p.  164,) 
and  other  Fathers  and  eminent  ecclesiastical  writers.  Zonaras, 
who  may  be  considered  as  high  authority  in  respect  of  the 
import  of  ecclesiastical  terms,  says,  that  "  the  word  '  church,' 
properly  denotes  a  congregation  of  the  faithful." — (Ad  Can.  6. 
Grang.  p.  314.)  We  see,  therefore,  from  the  scriptures  them- 
selves, and  from  the  authority  of  the  Fathers  whom  I  have 
quoted,  that  the  word  "  church"  does  not  signify  an  ecclesiastical 
synod  or  a  general  council — but  the  body  of  the  faithful.  So 
that  even  supposing  it  did  appear  from  the  scriptures,  that  the 
church  of  Christ  is  infallible,  it  is  evident  that  that  infallibility 
must  not  be  restricted  to  the  ecclesiastical  rulers,  but  must  be 
extended  to  the  entire  body  of  Christians  scattered  over  the 
world,  laics  as  well  as  ecclesiastics.  My  friend  next  referred 
to  Isaiah,  hx,  21,  and  he  told  us  that  many  Protestant  divines 
consider  the  prophet  as  speaking  in  that  passage  of  the  future 
church.  I  beg  to  say,  however,  that  many  learned  Protestants 
have  considered  it  as  referring  to  the  Jewish  church,  subsequently 
to  their  restoration  and  introduction  to  the  Christian  dispensation. 
— If  it  confers  a  privilege  on  any,  it  confers  it  on  all  who 
constitute  the  church  of  Christ;  but  it  seems  to  confer  it 
particularly  on  the  Jewish  church,  as  the  promise  was  originally 
addressed  to  them.  The  words  are,  "my  spirit  that  is  in  thee  shall 
not  depart  from  out  of  thy  mouth  from  henceforth,"  &c.  The 
learned  gentleman  in  his  next  remark,  also  followed  up  the 
petitio  principii,  "as  my  Father  sent  me,  so  also  send  I  you,"  and 
takes  for  granted  that  these  words  apply  to  successors  of  the 
Apostles.  But  the  onus  is  on  him  to  prove,  that  every  thing  said 
to  the  Apostles  is  also  said  to  their  successors ;  and  again  the 
onus  rests  on  him  to  show,  that  the  ecclesiastics  or  Popes  of 
Rome  are  the  successors  of  the  Apostles.  This  he  has  not  yet 
attempted  to  show,  and  until  he  does  so,  of  what  avail  are  allhis 
assertions.  Again  he  quotes,  "  Behold  I  am  with  you  all  days," 
and  asks,  how  could  he  be  with  the  Apostles  to  the  end  of  the 
world,  seeing  they  were  mortal  men  ?   He  should  bear  in  mind. 


24  THE  INFALLIBILITY    OF 

that  not  a  line  of  the  New  Testament  was  written  wlieh  n^  spn-AO 
these  words.  The  "end"  is  regarded  by  many  as  the  con- 
summation of  the  Mosaical  dispensation — the  original  word  is 
literally  "  age,"  and  not  world.  But  Christ  was  in  truth  with  the 
Apostles  while  in  the  flesh,  in  the  power  of  his  spirit ;  and  he  will 
no  doubt,  be  with  their  doctrines  (which  under  the  influence  of 
the  holy  spirit,  they  committed  to  writing,)  to  the  consummation 
of  time — blessing  them  to  the  salvation  of  thousands  yet  unborn. 
But  here  I  meet  my  friend,  and  deny  that  there  are  in  the  strict 
sense  of  the  term  any  successors  to  the  Apostles.  When  /  shall 
see  men  performing  miracles  in  the  broad  face  of  day,  like  them 
proving  their  doctrines  by  the  law  and  the  testimony,  evidencing 
by  the  holiness  of  their  lives  that  they  are  not  of  this  world,  and 
that  they  are  valiant  for  the  truth  on  earth ;  then,  and  not  till 
then,  can  I  allow,  that  there  are  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word 
any  successors  to  the  Apostles. 

"Whatever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven," 
has  been  alluded  to  by  my  friend.  Why  should  that  promise  be 
exclusively  claimed  by  the  Pope  and  his  clergy,  which  was  made 
to  the  Apostles  at  large. — (Mat.  xviii,  18.)  It  is  a  fact,  which 
rests  on  the  authority  of  historical  testimony,  that  no  bishop  of 
the  church  of  Rome  assumed  the  title  of  universal  bishop  till 
the  year  606,  in  the  time  of  Boniface  ;  and  Gregory  the  great, 
in  an  epistle  written  a  few  years  before  that  period,  makes  this 
striking  remark :  "  That  if  any  person  assume  the  title  of 
universal  priest,  he  is  a  forerunner  of  antichrist."  But  I  would 
ask,  if  the  promise  was  to  be  extended  to  any  of  the  successors, 
why  not  to  the  successor  of  Peter  at  Antioch,  and  to  the  succes- 
sors of  the  other  Apostles,  to  Polycarp,  and  to  others  of  the  early 
Fathers.  My  friend  has  said,  that  our  Saviour  promised  to  com- 
municate his  power  to  the  apostles,  when  he  said,  "  All  things 
are  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth."  I  really  cannot  dis- 
cover this  from  the  context.  It  is  said,  all  power  is  given  unto 
the  Saviour;  but  because  the  power  is  given  unto  him,  does  it  fol- 
low that  he  communicated  that  power  to  his  Apostles  and  then 
successors  ?  The  promises,  even  if  admitted  in  the  sense  of 
my  learned  friend,  rests  upon  this  condition,  "  Teaching  them  to 
observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you."  There-Q 
fore,  Mr.  Maguire  should  show  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  in 
accordance  with  the  word  of  God  1  My  friend  has  again  re- 
ferred to  the  church  being  "  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  faith." 
Now,  as  I  stated,  before  he  can  apply  this  or  any  similar  pas 
gage  to  the  church  of  Rome,  he  must  first  show  that  that  church 
is  the  church  of  Christ — this  he  has  not  yet  been  able  to  prove, 
and  I  assert  with  confidence  that  he  never  will. 

I  do  admit  indeed,  that  the  universal  body  of  the  faithful,  by 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  25 

setting  forth  the  purity  of  Christian  doctrine^,  hy  exhibiting  its 
practical  inflirence,  and  by  asseinbling  on  the  Lorcl'ri  day,  hold 
up  a  blazing  light  to  the  world,  are  "  an  Epistle  knov.  n  and  read 
of  men,"  and  thus  diffuse  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  But  I  do 
not  thence  infer,  that  infallibility  is  the  prerogative  o'  the  church 
of  Christ,  though  I  do  hold  that  against  the  faithful  tlie  gates  of 
hell  shall  not  prevail,  and  that  "neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels, 
nor  principalities,  nor  powers,  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to 
come,  nor  height  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature,  sliidl  be  able 
to  separate  them  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Ciirist  Jesus 
our  Lord."  To  be  preserved  by  the  power  of  Gocl,  and  to  be 
M  atched  over  by  his  providence,  does  not  imply  infallibility ;  and 
^•ithout  the  possession  of  such  a  prerogative,  the  church  of  Christ 
may  be  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth,  by  being  a  living  exemplar 
of  the  influence  of  Christian  doctrine."  "To  hear  the  Church," 
refers  not  to  the  universal  church,  but  to  the  particidciV  church  with 
which  the  parties  concerned  happen  to  be  connected.  How  is  it 
possible,  that  an  individual  could  make  his  complaint  to  the  uni- 
versal church  I  The  gentleman  has  endeavored  to  give  us  an 
illustration,  by  comparing  the  church  to  the  constituted  authorities 
of  the  land.  But  I  would  ask,  although  we  do  look  upon  them 
as  the  proper  expounders  of  the  law  of  the  nation,  and  appeal  te 
them  to  decide  in  matters  of  dispute  ;  and  although  \,  e  do  admit 
"  that  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God,"  does  this  argue, 
that  we  consider  them  as  infallible  ?  As  far  as  the  commands  of 
ihe  church  of  Christ  accord  with  the  word  of  God,  so  far,  and  no 
farther,  are  they  ratified  in  heaven. 

The  expression  "obey  your  prelates,"  my  frienil  has  also 
quoted.  Now,  in  the  original,  the  word  is  T^yov/ttsro::. — "  Obey 
them  that  have  the  rule  over  you."  We  must  be  careful  to 
attend  to  the  tenor  and  spirit  of  scripture,  and  call  no  man  mas- 
ter, save  in  so  far  as  his  guidance  is  agreeable  to  tbs  word  and 
will  of  God.  Let  it  not  be  imagined  that  I  am  oppo.^ed  to  pas- 
toral authority.  No,  far  from  it — "  Christ  gave  to  his  church, 
first,  apostles, — secondly,  prophets — thirdly,  pastors  and  teach- 
ers, for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  minis- 
try, for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ.  My  frien  '  is  referred 
to  the  passage,  "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth."  e  should 
have  continued  the  Saviour's  words,  "If  the  sa]i  .'  ive  lost  its 
«avor,  wherewith  shall  it  be  salted  ?"  Does  this,  ■  70uld  ask, 
look  like  infalhbility — "  If  the  salt  lose  its  sav..  /herewith 
shall  it  be  salted  ?  It  is  then  fit  for  nothing,  but  io  ;e  cast  out 
and  trodden  under  foot." 

Mr.  Maguire  has  also  referred  to  the  passage,  **'s.ose-soever 
sins  ye  forgive,  they  are  forgiven,  and  whose-socvsr  sins  ye 
retain,  they  are  retained."   Now  it  must  be  remembered,  that  at 

a 


26  TEIE    INFALLIBILITY  Of 

the  time  our  Lord  uttered  these  words,  not  a  hne  of  the  >[ct# 
Testament  was  wntten.  Christ  was  about  to  introduce  a  new 
dispensation  ;  ana  ne  appointed  his  Apostles  as  ministers  of  his 
new  kingdom,  with  authority  to  exact  laws  and  regulations  for 
the  governance  thereof.  The  Saviour  fully  commissioned  his 
Apostles  to  make  known  the  glories  of  his  divine  character,  and 
the  principles  of  Heaven's  administration — to  lay'down  the  way 
of  salvation,  clearly  and  fully  through  a  Redeemer's  blood,  and 
to  describe  the  character  of  those  whose  sins  had  been  blotted 
out,  or  in  other  words  to  depict  the  sanctifying  influence  of  the 
gospel  upon  the  life  and  conversation.  I  admit  the  power  of  the 
church  of  Christ  to  excommunicate  from  its  society  any,  who 
by  their  unholy  lives  disgrace  their  profession,  or,  by  their  errors 
as  to  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity,  give  evidence, 
that  they  are  not  the  followers  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour.  Bw 
even  the  authority  of  excommunication  is  restricted;  for  it  avail? 
not  except  so  far  as  the  decision  agrees  with  the  will  of  heaven. 
Further — there  is  no  standard  authority  as  to  discipline  in  the 
church  of  Rome  ;  for  Doctor  Doyle,  in  his  examination  on  oath 
before  the  Lord's  committee,  page  240,  when  asked,  "  Does 
die  last  article  in  the  priest's  oath  declare  every  thing  done  in 
•  he  council  of  Trent  binding?  "  replied,  "  That  regards  faith, 
i*)\  discipline.  The  French  church  never  received  the  decrees 
)»f  the  council  of  Trent  regarding  discipline:  and  in  a  part  of 
Ireland  such  decrees  are  not  received."  My  friend  has  spoken 
much  about  unity  of  sentiment  and  supreme  authority.  The 
passage  just  read  furnishes  a  sufTicient  commentary  on  his  as- 
sertions relative  to  these  points.  There  are  many  other  proofs 
which  I  could  adduce,  that  the  church  of  Rome  possesses  no 
claim  whatever  to  infallibility — but  my  time  at  present  does  not 
permit.     Mr.  Pope  here  resumed  his  seat. 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  regret  exceedingly,  that  after  all  my  en- 
deavours to  the  reverse,  this  controversy  is  likely  to  be  a  war  ol 
words,  and  not  of  argument.  Let  us  come  to  close  fighting — 
let  Mr.  Pope  propose  his  objections  seriatim,  and  I  pledge  my- 
tjclf  to  answer  them  to  your  satisfaction.  I  fearlessly  appeal  u^  , 
/scripture.  lie  has  stated  that  not  a  single  passage  in  the  Ne\» 
Testament  refers  to  church  authority  independently  of  the  con- 
gregation. 1  aver  that  there  are  many  such  passages  ;  when  our 
Saviour  says, — "  If  he  will  not  hear  thee,  tell  the  church  :  and  if 
he  will  not  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen 
and  the  publican  ;  "  he  evidently  alludes  to  a  tribunal  before 
which  the  oflender  is  to  be  arraigned.  Was  the  Bishop  to  be 
arraigned  before  the  peasant,  and  not  the  peasant  before  th^ 
Bishop?     No — Christ  intended  that  there  should  be  rulers  io 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  27 

his  church — that  the  Apostles,  with  their  successors,  shouk^ 
constitute  a  tribunal,  to  which  obedience  should  be  rendered 
and  from  which  the  ignorant  and  the  illiterate  should  receive 
instruction  in  the  faith.  Mr.  Pope  says,  that  our  Saviour  must 
refer  to  a  particular  church,  and  not  to  the  universal  church,  from 
the  impossibility  of  referring  to  the  latter.  He  might  as  well 
say,  that  any  individual  who  sought  redress  from  the  laws  of  his 
country,  should  appeal  to  the  congregated  magistrates  of  the 
country.  An  individual  can  appeal  to  a  Bishop,  as  to  a  magig 
trate — he  can  appeal  from  the  Bishop  to  a  Synod — from  the  Sy- 
nod he  can  appeal  to  the  Pope,  and  from  the  Pope  to  a  general 
Council,  which,  like  the  House  of  Lords,  is  the  last  resource. 
It  was  extraordinary  sophistry,  then,  to  argue,  as  Mr.  Pope  has 
done,  that  there  is  no  tribunal  but  the  universal  church. 

He  endeavors  to  bring  the  Holy  Fathers  into  a  qualified  dis- 
repute, as  Luther  did  before  him.  When  Luther  found  the 
authority  of  the  holy  Fathers  strong  against  him,  he  said,  "I  care 
not  if  a  thousand  Chrysostoms,  a  thousand  Cyprians,  a  thousand 
Augustines,  stood  up  against  me.  And  let  this  be  my  creed,  'I 
yield  to  no  man.'  "  Again,  he  says,  "  I,  Dr.  Martin  Luther,  as 
to  those  matters  (articles  of  faith,)  am  and  wish  to  be  deemed 
obstinate,  contumacious,  and  violent."  Such  was  Luther's  con- 
fession that  the  Fathers  were  against  him.  When  Luther  found 
a  great  number  of  sects  arising  amongst  the  reformers — Calvin 
denying  the  real  presence — Zuinglius  saying,  that  this  is  my 
BODY,  means  "this  represents  my  body,"  he  began  to  repent, 
and  he  threatened  to  return  to  Popery  again,  if  they  continued 
to  raise  such  schisms.  Mr.  Pope  should  not  endeavor  to  bring 
the  Holy  Fathers  into  disrepute.  If  he  says  that  they  were  fal- 
lible, which  I  admit,  yet  he  must  allow  that  they  are  good  and 
faithful  witnesses  of  what  was  the  Christian  doctrine  in  their 
days.  If  I  show,  as  I  will,  the  infallibility  of  the  church  to  be 
the  doctrine  of  sixty  Fathers  at  a  time,  when  Mr.  Pope  will  ad- 
mit that  the  church  was  pure,  then  is  it  not  evident  that  such 
doctrine  must  be  true  ?  If  Mr.  Pope  answers  in  the  negative, 
then  he  must  contradict  all  Protestants  who  admit  the  authority 
of  the  first  four  councils — I  do  not  include  the  council  of  Jeru- 
salem. Mr.  Pope  has  said,  that  he  cannot  discover  where  this 
authority  exists  in  the  Cathohc  church.  If  he  had  examined 
our  divines  and  canonists,  he  would  find  that  the  Pope,  at  the 
head  of  a  council  regularly  convened,  in  their  decrees  regard- 
ing faith,  are  admitted  to  be  infallible.  That  is  one  instance. — 
Also,  if  the  Pope,  with  a  few  bishops  assembled,  should  issue 
decrees  touching  the  deposit  of  faith,  and  which  are  subsequently 
received  by  the  church  dispersed,  we  account  them  infallible,  as 
otherwise  the  promises  of  Christ  to  his  church  would  fail. 


2h  THE    INFALLIBILITY  OF 

As  10  tl.c  title  Ecumenical,  assumed  by  Boniface,  it  certainly 
was  condemned  by  Gregol^  the  Great,  when  assumed  in  a  dif- 
ferent sense  by  the  patriarcn  of  Constantinople.  It  was  then 
condemned  by  Gregory  as  a  blasphemous  heresy,  because,  as 
he  said,  there  was  no  universal  bishop  in  the  unlimited  sens'e 
meant  by  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  but  Christ,  who  is 
with  his  church  to  the  end  of  the  world,  teaching  and  preaching. 
But  in  a  limited  sense,  the  expression  is  not  to  be  condemned, 
and  that  was  the  sense  in  which  it  was    claimed  by  Boniface. 

Again,  "  as  the  Father  has  sent  me,  1  also  send  you."  Mr. 
Pope  says,  I  did  not  prove  that  this  was  directed  to  any  but  the 
apostles.  I  have  already  proved  that  our  Savior  promised  he 
would  be  with  them  to  the  end  of  the  world — not  that  they  should 
live  in  a  physical,  but  in  a  moral  sense,  and  survive  in  the  per- 
sons of  their  successors.  Mr.  Pope  says  that  this  applied  to 
the  Jewish  church.  I  am  sure  the  church  of  England  will  be 
much  obliged  to  him,  for  all  his  arguments  tend  as  strongly 
against  the  established  church  of  England,  as  against  the  church 
of  Rome.  The  church  of  England,  in  her  homiUes,  declares 
that  she  will  not  endure  a  departure  from  her  liturgy  in  the  slight- 
est degree.  So  fir  she  claims  obedience  to  her  authority  as 
well  as  the  Catholic  church.  There  could  not  in  fact  exist  any 
regularity  or  order  if  Christ  did  not  leave  an  authority  to  his 
church.  Mr.  Pope  says,  granting  for  a  moment  the  church  of 
Christ  to  be  infallible,  that  the  onus  lies  upon  me  to  prove  that 
the  church  of  Rome  is  the  church  of  Christ — this  argument  is 
merely  ad  captandum.  After  I  have  proved  that  Christ  estab- 
lished one  true  and  infallible  church  on  earth,  do  I  not  lay  the 
hatchet  to  the  root  of  all  the  rest,  and  thus  prove  the  falsehood 
of  all  the  heresies  that  have  separated  from  that  church "?  and 
consequently  have  I  not  broken  the  neck  of  Protestantism  gen- 
erally '?  Is  it  not  evident  that  I  can  prove  the  infallibility  of  the 
church  in  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  and  under  their  successors, 
the  bishops  and  martyrs,  who  died  for  the  truth  ?  If  Mr.  Pope 
once  admits  the  infallibility  of  any  church,  I  have  gained  mv 
point.,  I  have  proved  to  you  manifestly  that  the  passage  whicl 
I  quoted  from  Isaiah  has  reference  to  a  future  church.  I  shah 
read  to  you  the  passage  again,  with  the  preceding  verse  : — 

"  And  there  shall  come  a  Redeemer  to  Zion,  and  to  them  that  return  from 
iniquity  in  Jacob,  saith  the  Lord.  This  is  my  covenant  with  them,  saith  the 
Lord;  my  spirit  that  is  in  thee,  and  my  words  that  I  have  put  into  thy  mouth, 
shall  not  depart  out  of  thy  mouth,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed,  nor  out 
of  the  moutli  of  thy  seed's  seed,  saith  the  Lord,  from  henceforth,  an^  forever." 
Isaiah,  \ix,  20,  21. 

Here  the  inspired  prophet  speaks  of  a  Redeemer  to  come  to 
Zic  .1,  and  to  establish  his  church.      Could  there  be  a  more  obvi- 


THE   ROMAN  CATHOLIC   CHURCH.  29 

ous  allusion  to  Christ  and  bis  church.  In  reference  to  my  quolp- 
lion  "ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth,'*  Mr.  Pope  has  reminded  ..le 
of  the  addition,  "  If  the  salt  shall  lose  its  savor."  I  deny  that 
the  salt  does  lose  its  savor — I  am  not  a  chemist,  but  I  can  state 
upon  the  authority  of  the  most  learned  men,  that  salt  cannot  lose 
its  savor — this,  therefore,  proves  the  infallibility  of  the  church. 
The  Apostles  are  compared  to  salt,  and  as  soon  as  the  salt  xvoida 
lose  its  savor,  they  would  lose  their  infallibility — that  is  never. 
Mr.  Pope  argues  that  when  Christ  talked  of  the  church,  he  talked 
of  the  laity — will  it  be  inferred,  because  Christ  speaks  one  time 
in  the  aggregate,  that  he  never  speaks  particularly  of  the  bishops 
and  rulers  whom  the  Holy  spirit  appointed  to  govern  the  church. 
Mr.  Pope  says  that  the  passage,  "  obey  your  preUtes,"  means, 
"  obey  your  superiors  in  general."  What  says  the  Apostle  Paul  ] 
"  Obey  your  prelates,  and  be  subject  to  them.  For  they  watch,  as  beinj 
to  render  an  account  of  your  souls,"  &c. 

Are  laymen,  or  magistrates,  by  Christ's  appointment,  to  ren 
der  an  account  of  our  souls'?  It  would  be  absurd  to  suppose 
that  the  bishops  should  give  an  account  of  that  which  they  have 
not  the  government.  What  signifies  how  a  governm.ent  exists, 
if  obedience  be  not  rendered  to  it  ? — How  absurd  to  suppose 
that  an  authority  couid  exist,  and  yet  the  people  not  be  obliged 
to  obey  it.  It  is  evident  if  an  episcopal  church  were  established 
by  Christ,  that  bishops  must  be  recognised  in  it.  Our  Saviour 
gave  the  feeding  of  the  sheep  and  lambs  to  one,  but  he  also 
gave  the  feeding  of  the  lambs  to  the  bishops.  Mr.  Pope 
contends  that  the  text  *'  Feed  my  lambs,  and  feed  my  sheep," 
equally  applies  to  all  the  Apostles,  but  did  not  Christ  address 
himself  to  Peter  only^  when  he  said,  "  Simon  Barjona,  lovest 
thou  me  more  than  these?"  And  when  Peter  answered  "Yea, 
Lord," — Christ  replied,  "  Feed  my  lambs,  feed  my  sheep." — 
Did  he  not  also  declare  that  there  should  be  but  "  one  fold,  and 
one  shepherd."  Now  I  should  be  glad  to  learn  what  is  there 
in  a  sheep-fold,  beyond  sheep  and  lambs  1  That  is — dropping 
the  metaphor,  beyond  clergy  and  laity.  When,  therefore,  Christ 
commissioned  Peter  to  feed  both  sheep  and  lambs,  he  gave  him 
a  charge  over  the  clergy  as  well  as  the  laity. — This  is  the  sacrcid 
edifice  raised  by  Christ,  from  which  Mr.  Pope  has  not  been  able 
to  pick  a  single  stone. 

Mr.  Pope  has  pronounced  an  eulogium  upon  the  scriptures— 
I  too  love  and  honor  them,  and  I  trust  that  in  my  life,  I  follow 
their  commands.  I  pay  that  respect  to  the  scriptures,  which  I 
pay  to  the  images  of  our  Saviour,  his  Apostles,  and  martyrs ;  I 
follow  their  precepts,  I  hope  ;  but  as  to  the  adoration  either  of 
scriptures  or  of  images,  my  soul  abhors — my  nerves  shrink  from 
it.     If,  however  the  scriptures  had  been  intended  as  the  sole 

3* 


30  THE  INFALLIBILITY    OF 

rule  of  faith,  it  is  evident  that  Christ  would  have  given  a  com- 
mand to  write  them.  But  no  such  command  was  given  by  our 
Saviour.  He  ordered  his  Apostles  to  go  teach  and  preach  ;  and 
that  those  who  believed  would  be  saved.  Believed  what  ?  The 
preaching  of  the  Apostles.  But  he  said  nothing  about  writiog. 
My  arguments  remain  solid  and  undisturbed.  I  therefore  sit 
down,  till  objections  of  a  more  tangible  and  serious  nature  shall 
be  advanced. 

Mr.  Pope  rose  and  said — My  learned  friend  has  observed, 
that  he  will  wait,  until  some  stronger  arguments  shall  be  brought 
forward  against  him.  I  really  commend  the  spirit  which  he  has 
evinced  on  this  occasion.  He  remarks,  that  the  arguments 
which  I  have  advanced  are  not  sufficiently  weighty  to  deserve  a 
reply  ;  and  he  reserves  his  proofs,  that  the  church  of  Rome  is 
the  church  of  Christ,  until  the  third  day  of  the  discussion.  The 
passages  of  scripture  which  speak  of  the  church,  I  again  affirm, 
do  not  refer  to  ecclesiastics  exclusively.  While  I  admit,  that 
the  church  of  Christ  will  be  preserved  through  every  age,  and 
that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  never  prevail  against  it,  I  still  main 
tain,  that  not  one  single  passage  of  scripture  has  been  adduced, 
or  can  be  brought  forward,  proving  that  our  Saviour  conferred 
infallibiliiy  upon  his  church ;  and  I  again  put  Mr.  Maguire  to  the 
proof  of  it. 

I  shall  now  show  you,  from  the  testimony  of  Roman  Catholic 
writers,  that  the  term,  "  church  of  Rome,"  was  not  considered 
as  a  designation  of  the  general  church  of  Christ;  but  that  it  was 
at  first  merely  given  to  distinguish  that  particular  church  ^rom 
other  churches — I  would  therefore  ask,  on  what  ground  can  the 
church  of  Rome  arrogate  to  herself  the  right  of  being  consid- 
ered as  the  church  of  Christ,,  more  than  other  churches.  Du- 
pin,  a  Roman  Cathohc  historian,  and  a  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne, 
has  the  following  passage  : 

"  It  is  true  (says  he)  that  at  present  the  name  of  the  church  of  Rome  ig 
given  to  the  Catholic  church,  and  that  these  two  terms  pass  for  synonymous. 
But  in  antiquity  no  more  was  intended  by  the  name  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
than  the  church  of  the  city  of  Rome ;  and  the  Popes  in  their  subscriptions 
and  superscriptions,  took  simply  the  quality  of  Bishops  of  Rome.  The 
Greek  schismatics  seem  to  be  the  first  who  gave  the  name  of  the  church  of 
Rome  to  all  the  churches  of  the  West ;  whence  the  Latins  made  use  of  this 
to  distinguish  the  churches  which  communicated  with  the  church  of  Rome, 
from  the  Greeks,  who  were  separated  from  her  communion.  From  this  came 
the  custom  to  give  the  name  of  the  church  of  Rome  to  the  Catholic  church.— 
But  the  other  churches  did  not  for  this  lose  their  name  or  their  authority,"  &c. 
— {Dupin.  TraiU  de  la  Piiiss.  Eccles.  i^c,  p.  551.) 

Here,  then,  we  see  nothing,  even  upon  Roman  Catholic  testi- 
mony, to  induce  us  to  esteem  the  Roman  Cathohc  church  as 
exclusively  the  church  of  Christ. 


THE  ROMAN  CATLOLIC  CHURCH  31 

Again,  Pope  Innocent  III  tells  us,  (lib.  ii,  Ep.  5 CO.) 
"  The  church,  indeed,  is  called  Universal,  which  consists  of  all  churches, 
every  where,  which,  by  a  Greek  word,  is  denominated  CathoHc,  thus  ths 
Roman  church  is  not  the  Universal  church,  but   a  part  op  the 
Universal  church." 

Here  are  tbe  opinions  of  a  Pope  and  a  Roman  Catholic  his- 
torian. Both  passages  clearly  show,  that  the  term  "  church  of 
Rome,"  did  not  signify  the  universal  church  of  Christ,  but  that 
the  title  merely  distinguished  it  from  the  other  churches,  which 
had  been  established  in  various  parts  of  the  world. 

I  shall  now  show  you,  that  the  Fathers  referred  to  the  written 
word  as  the  standard  of  faith.  I  shall  quote  to  you  the  opinion 
of  St.  Ignatius,  who  w-as  contemporary  with  the  Apostles,  and 
successor  (so  to  speak)  of  St.  Peter  in  Antioch. — It  is  recorded 
by  Eusebius,  lib.  iii,  Ecc.  Hist.  cap.  36.  He  informs  us,  that 
Ignatius  being  on  his  way  from  Syria  to  Rome,  where  he  was 
to  suffer  martyrdom,  addressed  himself  to  the  several  churches 
on  his  journey,  establishing  them  in  the  faith,  and  cautioning 
them  against  the  heresies  which  then  prevailed. — "He  exhorted 
them  to  hold  firmly  by  the  tradition  of  the  Jlpostles,  which  testify- 
ing  that  it  had  been  already  committed  to  writings  he  declared  xcas 
necfssarily  so  for  its  preservation,^^ 

Augustine  also,  in  his  lib.  iii,  contr.  Lit.  Petiliani  c.  6. 

"If  any  one  concerning  Christ  or  his  church,  or  concerning  any  other  thing 
which  belongs  to  faith  or  our  life,  I  will  not  say,  if  we,  but  (what  Paul  hatli 
added)  if  an  angel  from  heaven  shall  preach  unto  you,  beside  what  you  have 
received  in  the  legal  and  evangelical  scripture,  let  nini  be  accursed." 

Again,  St.  Jerome,  in  c.  1st,  Aggaei. 

"Those  things  which  they  make  and  find,  as  it  were,  by  Apostolical  tradi- 
tion, without  the  authority  and  testimony  5f  Scripture,  the  word  of  God 
smites." 

In  my  letter  to  Mr.  Maguire,  which  appeared  in  the  pubhc 
prints,  I  referred  to  the  opposition  maintained  by  the  early 
Fathers  against  the  authority  of  the  church  of  Rome.  Whenever, 
therefore,  they  advocated  the  authority  of  the  church  of  Christ, 
it  would  not  be  the  authority  of  that  church  ichich  they  themselves 
opposed.  But  my  friend  brought  forward  an  analogy,  and  asked 
me,  *'  does  not  each  particular  magistrate  in  his  own  jurisdiction 
represent  the  executive  authority?"  And  he  argued  from  this, 
that  each  and  every  individual  bishop  should  be  regarded  in  the 
same  hght  with  respect  to  the  church.  I  ask  him,  will  ho  say 
that  each  and  every  particular  bishop  of  the  church  of  Rome  is 
infallible  1     I  am  sure  Mr.  Maguire  believes  no  such  thing. 

Further — in  order  to  show  my  friend,  that  the  power  of  judg- 
ing was  vested  not  in  a  single  person,  but  in  the  body  of  the 
Christian  congregation,  I  refer  him  to  the  first  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  v,  12,  where  the  apostle  asks,  "  Do  vou  iiot  judge 


32  THE    INFALLIBILITY  OF 

thein  that  re  within?'  And  I  inquire,  to  whom  was  this  query 
addressed  ]  Was  it  to  the  ecclesiastical  rulers,  or  to  the  body 
of  the  church  ]  Consult  the  Douay  edition  of  the  scriptures 
and  you  v.'/  and,  that  the  epistle  is  addressed  "to  the  church  of 
God  that  13  at  Corinth,  to  them  that  are  sanctified  in  Christ 
Jesus,  called  to  be  saints,  with  all  that  invoke  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  in  every  place." — Now,  I  would  ask  my  friend,  are  ec- 
clesiastical officers  the  only  individuals  thus  denominated?  Are 
they  alone  the  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus  ?  Are  they  alone  called 
to  be  saint^^  and  do  they  alone  invoke  the  name  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour?  i  the  2d  epistle  to  the  same  church,  ii,  10,  it  is  said, 
"  to  whom  0  have  pardoned  any  thing,  I  also.''  A  reference 
to  the  epi  '  '  vill  show  that  this  passage  also  refers  to  the  entire 
body.  My  /  lend  quoted  a  verse  of  the  18lh  chapter  of  Matthew 
*'  Wherever  iwo  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name, 
there  am  I  i.i  the  midst  of  them."  Now  I  of  course  admit  this. 
The  great  head  of  the  church,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  present 
with  his  people,  wherever  they  are  congregated  in  his  name. — 
But,  though  ;;resent  with  them  by  His  Spirit,  does  he,  therefore, 
confer  on  r   ^--i  the  prerogative  of  infalhbihty  ? 

As  to  th  itimony  of  the  Fathers — I  am  quite  willing  to  admit, 
that  they  m  :  '  be  referred  to  as  faithful  witnesses  of  the  opinions 
current  in  .sir  times.  And,  is  not  every  faithful  historian 
entitled  i  •  i  -3  same  credit?  But  I  would  ask,  when  we  refer 
to  Hume,  ,■  to  any  other  historian,  do  we  thence  infer,  that, 
because  they  are  faithful  witnesses,  they  are,  therefore,  infallible  ? 
My  friend  has  referred  ro  two  sources  of  infallibility.  Now 
ive  are  irifonned  by  Crarles  Butler,  Esq.,  in  his  Book  of  tho 
Roman  Ciilholic  church, *p.  121 — 124,  that  there  does  exist  a 
difference  :  :lvveen  the  Italians  and  the  French  church,  respect- 
ing the  infcLiiibility  of  the  Pope.  The  ItaUans  believe  in  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  Pope  ;  the  French  hold  the  contrary  opinion — 
the  former  receive  the  dogmas  of  the  Pope  as  infallible  ;  the 
latter  reject  them,  if  they  be  only  per  se  or  ex-cathedra.  Here  we 
have  two  bodies  referring  to  sources  of  infallibility,  which  may 
often  jar  Vv  ith  each  other.  I  therefore  ask,  can  there  be  any 
certainty,  on  their  own  grounds,  as  to  the  foundation  of  their  faith? 
My  friend  has  commented  on  the  opinion  of  Pope  Gregory,  in 
reference  to  the  title  of  the  Pope.    I  shall  read  to  you  the  passage. 

"I  confidontly  say,  that  whosoever  calls  himself  the  Universal  Priest,  oi 
desires  to  bo  no  called,  in  his  arrogance,  is  a  forerunner  of  Antichrist." — Lib» 
vi,  Ep.  30. 

Gregory  YII,  tells  us,  1.  ii,  ep.  55,  that  "  the  Roman  Pontitf 
alone  is  ri'^htly  called  universal."  Here  then  again  you  will 
perceive,  that  we  have  Pope  against  Pope,  and  one  body  against 
another  body  on  the  authority  smd  infallibility  of  the  Pope.     In 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  33 

relation  to  the  passage  which  my  friend  has  quoted,  where  our 
Saviour  says,  "he  will  be  with  his  disciples  to  the  consummation 
of  time,"  I  merely  observed,  that  it  is  the  opinion  of  some  an- 
cient critics,  that  the  words  mean  "  to  the  end  of  the  Mosaic 
dispensation," — not  but  that  our  Saviour  will  be  with  his  Apostles 
in  their  ivritings  to  the  end  of  time.  While,  however,  I  men- 
tion this,  merely  as  the  opinion  of  eminent  critics,  I  am  quite 
wilHng  to  allow,  that,  although  the  Apostles  have  no  successors 
in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term,  our  Lord  has  promised  to  be  with 
those  who  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  by  giving  seals  to 
their  ministry,  as  long  as  they  continue  to  teach  whatsoever  he  has 
commanded  in  His  Holy  Word, 

My  triend  has  again  referred  to  the  passage  which  says,  "  if 
the  salt  lose  its  savor,"  and  he  has  told  us,  that  salt  cannot  lose 
its  flavor,  and  therefore  would  build  upon  it  the  infaJUbility  of  the 
church  of  Rome.  That  salt  for  a  long  time  retains  its  savor,  I 
admit ;  but  can  my  friend  prove  that  it  is  never  decomposed. — 
And  does  he  not,  by  his  remark  upon  the  passage,  make  the 
adorable  Redeemer  contradict  himself?  Although  our  Lord 
knew  all  things,  we  invariably  find  him,  in  his  discourses  with  his 
disciples  and  others,  using  those  terms  which  were  most  familiar 
to  them,  and  accommodating  his  language  to  their  capacities 
and  modes  of  thinking. — Even  in  the  present  day,  we  speak  of 
the  rising  and  setting  of  the  sun,  although  it  is  known  that  the 
sun  neither  rises  nor  sets. — These  remarks  account  for  our 
Saviour's  employing  the  mode  of  expression  which  we  are  con- 
sidering. In  connection  with  this  passage,  I  would  ask,  was 
there  not  a  Judas  even  among  the  Apostles,  and  did  he  not  sell 
his  master,  and  put  himself  to  death] 

I  shall  now  refer  Mr.  Maguire  to  a  passage  of  scripture,  and 
I  ask  him  how  he  can  reconcile  the  infallibility  of  the  church  of 
Rome  with  if?  In  Romans,  xi,  22,  "  See  then  the  goodness  and 
the  severity  of  God  :  towards  them  indeed  that  are  fallen,  the 
severity ;  but  towards  thee,  the  goodness  of  God,  if  thou  abide 
in  goodness,  otherwise  thou  also  shall  he  cut  off.^^  Mark  this! 
"  otherwise  thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off."  I  ask,  doies  the  church 
of  Rome  m  the  present  day  wish  to  identify  herself  with  the  early 
church  to  which  the  Apostle  wrote  these  words,  or  not?  If  not, 
then  is  her  antiquity  scattered  to  the  four  winds  of  heaven.  And 
if  she  4oes,  I  would  ask,  is  not  this  a  strange  threat  to  be 
addressee  lu  ::r  infallible  church ! 

My  friend  has  again  quoted  the  passage,  "  He  that  will  not 
hear  the  church" — but  can  he  show  that  this  speaks  of  pastors 
exclusively,  and  not  of  the  people  also?  I  have  already  proved, 
that  every  Christian  body  is  authorised  to  judge  them  that  ar« 
wuiiiu.     "Feed  my  sheep"  was  another  passage  brought  for- 


S4  THE    INFALLIBILITY  OF 

ward  by  Mr  Maguire  ;  and  in  reference  to  it,  I  beg  to  call  your 
attention  to  the  authorities  of  some  early  Fathers  on  the  sub- 
ject. St.  xlugustin  says — "when  it  is  said  unto  Peter,  '  feed 
my  sheep,'  it  is  said  unto  all." — (De  agon.  Christ,  c.  30.)  St. 
Ambrose  says,  "  which  sheep  and  flock  St.  Peter  did  not 
receive  alone,  but  we  all  received  them  with  him." — (Lib.  dc 
Sacred.)  The  passage,  "  one  fold  and  one  shepherd,"  has  been 
quoted  by  Mr.  Maguire.  Our  Lord's  meaning  clearly  is  this, 
that  the  church  which  had  been  confined  exclusively  to  the  Jews, 
was  now  to  combine  both  Jew  and  Gentile  ;  that  the  barrier 
which  separated  them,  was  henceforth  to  be  thrown  down,  and 
the  waters  of  life  to  flow  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Jewish  people, 
carrying  health  and  fertility  through  the  whole  world.  The 
onus  lies  on  my  friend,  to  show  where  the  church  of  Rome  is 
called  the  church  of  Christ,  or  where  the  Pope  is  called  the 
shepherd.  I  am  convinced  that  he  cannot  do  so.  I  assert,  on 
the  contrary,  that  to  call  any  creature  the  head  of  Christ's  church 
on  earth,  is  to  utter  a  blasphemy  against  the  Son  of  God,  who 
is  alone  the  head  of  the  church.  The  Psalmist  says,  "  The 
Lord  is  my  shepherd,  and  I  shall  not  want." — Psalm  xxii.  But 
my  friend  has  again  referred  to  the  passage  in  Isaiah,  where  it  is 
said,  that  "  the  words  of  the  Lord  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy 
mouth  from  henceforth  and  for  ever."  If  you  consult  the  con- 
text, you  will  perceive  that  it  was  probably  addressed  in  an  espe- 
cial sense  to  the  Jewish  church,  as  he  mentions  Zion  and  Jacob. 
Some  commentators  do  refer  it  to  the  restoration  of  literal  Israel. 
But  in  truth,  if  this  promise  confers  infallibility  on  any  church, 
then  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit  will  confer  infallibility  on 
every  believer.  In  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  St.  Paul  says, 
"  If  an}^  man  have  not  the  spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his." 
Now,  I  ask  my  friend,  are  we  to  understand  by  this,  that  every 
individual  having  the  spirit  of  Christ  is  thereby  rendered  infalli- 
ble ?  May  not  a  person  be  enlightened  by  the  holy  sphit,  with- 
out being  rendered  infalhble  also  ?  The  passage  from  Isaiah, 
therefore,  does  not  prove  any  thing  for  my  learned  friend's  argu- 
ment. He  has  again  quoted,  "  Obey  your  prelates."  Now,  I 
find  in  other  parts  of  the  sacred  scriptures,  that  we  are  desired 
"  to  try  the  spirits  whether  they  are  of  God,  because  many  false 
prophets  have  gone  out  into  the  world."  Again,  I  read,  "  to 
the  law  and  to  the  testimony,  if  they  speak  not  according  to 
this  word,  it  is  because  there  is  no  light  in  them,"  or  as  the 
Douay  version  gives  it,  "  they  shall  not  see  the  morning  light." 
And  again,  I  find  St.  Paul  saying,  "  I  speak  as  unto  wise  men, 
judge  ye  yourselves  what  I  say." — (1  Cor.  x,  15.)  And  our 
Lord  himself  asks,  "  why  even  of  your  ownselves,  judge  ye  not 
w^hat  is  right?" — (Luke  xii,  67,)     If  we  aie  thus  desired  to  try 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC   CHURCH.  35 

he  spirits — to  go  to  the  law  and  the  testimony  and  to  judge 
md  examine  for  ourselves,  are  we,  in  opposition  to  the  express 
iiccates  of  the  word  of  God,  to  receive  every  thing  which  an 
:;cc]osiastic  tells  us,  without  examining  whether  the  doctrines  and 
precepts  inculcated  up6n  us  are  in, accordance  with,  or  opposed 
(o,  the  revealed  will  of  heaven  1  And  if  we  are  authorised  to 
3X amine,  as  to  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  the  doctrines  brought 
before  us,  then  will  it  clearly  follow,  that  no  church  is  infaUible. 

In  conclusion,  I  shall  now  propose  one  or  two  questions  to 
(ny  learned  friend,  to  which  I  shall  thank  him  to  give  me  ex- 
plicit answers.  In  the  first  place,  I  should  wish  him  to  inform 
ji  e,  how  many  general  Councils  have  been  held  ] 

Secondly — By  what  characteristics  are  general  Councils  to 
br  distinguished  from  others  ? 

Thirdly — Can  my  reverend  friend  produce  an  authenticated 
translation  of  the  scriptures,  perfect  and  infallible  1 

And  Fourthly — Can  he  point  us  to  an  infallible  commentary 
upon  those  scriptures  1 

These  questions  I  put  to  him,  and  these  questions  must  be 
satisfactorily  answered  ;  or  else  I  assert,  that  I  have  strong  pre- 
sumptive evidence  against  the  infallibility  of  the  church  of  Rome. 
For  I  say,  if  the  church  of  Rome  be  infallible,  we  may  expect, 
that  she  is  able  to  refer  her  doctrines  to  an  infallible  and  clearly 
attested  standard — and  that  she  has  given  to  her  people  an  infal- 
lible and  authentic  version  of  the  sacred  scriptures — and,  as  she 
holds  that  a  commentary  is  indispensably  necessary,  we  may 
also  expect  that  she  has  furnished  an  infallible  commentary,  so 
that  her  followers  may  not  wander  in  the  wilderness  of  error 
but  have  a  sure  and  certain  guide  to  direct  them,  A  priest 
declares  at  his  ordination  on  oath,  that  he, 

"  Unhesitatingly  receives  all  things,  defined,  delivered,  and  declared  by  the 
noly  canons,  and  general  councils ;  " 

and  I  ask,  therefore,  have  I  not  a  right  to  put  these  questions  to 
any  priest  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church! 

Mr.  Maguire. — It  may,  perhaps,  appear  to  many  of  my 
auditory,  that  I  have  an  Herculean  task  to  perform.  A  great 
number  of  questions  have  been  put  to  me  to  answer,  which  would 
require  much  more  than  the  comparatively  short  period  allotted 
to  me  for  addressing  you.  Mr.  Pope  opened  his  speech  by 
endeavoring  to  draw  a  distinction  between  the  church  of  Rome 
and  the  Catholic  church.  1  beg  and  crave  the  kind  and  impar- 
tial attention  of  all,  while  I  clear  up  what  he  seems  to  consider 
an  insurmountable  difficulty.  In  the  early  ages  of  Christianity 
llie  church  was  not  known  by  any  other  name  than  that  of  the 


36  THE  INFALLIBILITY   OF 

Catholic  (Iiurch.  It  was  so  designated  in  the  Apostles'  creed. 
iNo  otntr  church  had  then  the  audacity  to  compare  itself  with 
the  cnurcli  of  Christ.  In  the  lapse  of  time,  however,  when  the 
Arians  bocame  impudent  and  powerful — when  they  got  the 
Emperor  Constantius  on  their  side,  and  the  temporal  power  was 
employed  to  subvert  the  church  of  Christ — when,  in  fine,  those 
heretics,  i 'litating  the  example  of  Julian  the  apostate,  who  looted 
up  the  fci  .dation  of  the  old  temple  of  Jerusalem,  and  vainly 
aUemptcd  U)  rebuild  it,  in  order  to  falsify  the  prediction  of  the 
Son  of  Gel — sought  to  disprove  the  promises  of  Christ  to  his 
church,  by  overturning  its  government,  and  establishing  a  new 
one — it  Vv'is  then  thought  necessary,  for  distinction  sake,  to 
superadd  the  epithet  Roman,  as  a  communion  with  the  See  of 
Rome  was  looked  upon  as  the  test  of  unity,  and  all  other  churches 
declared  ho: etical  or  schismatical,  which  refused  to  acknowledge 
the  bisho})  o:  Rome,  the  vicar  of  Christ  on  earth.  Thus  the 
word  conr.abstantial  was  first  introduced  at  the  Council  of  Nice. 
We  all  kii  ■  that  the  term  had  no  origin  in  the  scriptures.  The 
word,  however,  is  to  be  found  in  the  Liturgy  of  the  Protestant 
church.  Tiiy  friend  must  admit  that  the  term  "Roman  "  was  in- 
troduced lawfully,  and  according  to  the  gospel,  or  he  must  deny 
that  the  term  "  consubstantial,"  was  introduced  lawfully — he 
must  deny  the  Council  of  Nice,  which  is  acknowledged  by  Dr. 
Walton,  till  A  all  Protestant  historians.  The  name  makes  nothing 
for  my  fii^i  d's  argument.  Though  the  name  Roman  has 
been  adde  "t  is  still  the  same  church.  When  Arius  broachec' 
his  heres  ^  :\\3  Catholic  church  either  then  was  in  existence,  or 
it  was  not.  If  it  was  then  in  existence,  Arius  had  no  right  to 
set  up  a  ch  irch  against  the  church  of  God.  If  it  was  not  the 
Catholic  ciiurch  which  condemned  Arius,  the  church  which  he 
set  up  coUi  i  not  be  the  Catholic  church,  for  he,  for  a  time,  stood 
alone.  Wh^re  was  the  Catholic  church  at  the  time  when  Luther, 
as  he  says  himself,  stood  alone,  and  was  the  only  one  who  had 
the  courage  to  apply  the  hatchet  to  the  root  of  Popery  ?  The 
name  Roi.  ^  was  then,  as  t  have  clearly  proved  to  you,  giver 
to  the  Ca        c  church  to  serve  as  a  distinction. 

I  have  ady  explained  to  you,  that  the  title  ecumenical,  as 
assumed  \y.  .he  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  was  blasphemous. 
Christ  is  the  only  ecumenical  pastor — he  is  the  foundation  and 
the  corner  lone.  The  Apostles  formed  the  edifice — But  if  the 
word  be  ta  en  in  the  limited  sense  in  which  it  is  applied  to  the 
bishop  of  llome — that  is  the  visible  head  of  the  Universal 
Church — it  is  not  blasphemy.  Mr.  Pope  has  repeated  the  quo- 
tation from  St.  Augustin — there  the  arguments  of  St.  Angus- 
tin  are  em;)]oyed  against  the  Donatists,  who,  like  ]>Ir.  Pope 
Dim&elf,  set  up  their  own  authority  against  t'./at  of  the  Cath-^llo 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  37 

church — who  appeakd  from  the  authority  of  the  church,  and 
from  a  regularly  ordained  ministry  to  their  own  private  opinions. 
It  is  just  as  if  an  individual  having  been  condemned  in  the 
King's  Bench,  then  appealed  to  the  House  of  Lords,  and  then 
to  the  King,  and,  on  the  decision  being  given  against  him,  he 
should  recur  to  his  own  private  authority. 

Mr.  Pope  has  quoted  St.  Augustin  and  St.  Jerome,  who  dis- 
tinguished between  the  church  of  Rome,  and  the  Catholic  church. 
But  these  fathers  have  sometimes  spoken  of  the  church  of  Rome 
as  a  diocess,  or  as  a  patriarchate.  Did  they,  however,  deny 
that  the  church  of  Rome  was  the  mother  and  matrice  of  all  other 
churches  ?     Let  them  speak  for  themselves. 

In  his  eleventh  book  De  Doctrina  Christiana,  where  laying 
down  a  rule  to  distinguish  canonical  books,  St.  Augustin  says-  ♦ 

"In  this  inquiry,  the  authority  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Churches  must  be 
followed,  and  particularly  of  those  that  hold  apostolical  sees,  and  received 
epistles  from  the  Apostles." 

And  lib.  Contra  Evistolam  Fundamenti,  he  says — 

"  Many  are  the  considerations  which  keep  me  in  the  Catholic  church — th< 
ajsent  of  nations — her  authority — first  established  by  miracles — cherished 
by  hope — extended  by  charity — strengthened  by  lapse  of  years  ;  the  succes 
5ion  of  pastors  from  the  chair  of  Peter,  to  whom  the  Lord  committed  the  care  of 
feeding  his  flock  down  to  the  present  bishop  ;  lastly,  the  name  itself  of  Catholic.'*^ 

Thus  he  identifies  the  Catholic  church  with  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  to  whom  he  says,  Christ  committed  the  care  of  feeding 
his  flock.  So  much  for  the  distinction  between  the  church  of 
Rome  and  the  Catholic  church. 

Mr.  Pope  admits,  that  a  man  may  be  excommunicated.  How 
can  the  church  excommunicate  unless  it  possess  authority  ]  Is 
it  not  evident  too,  that  it  is  an  authority  to  which  man  should 
yield  obedience?     What  does  St.  Augustin  say? 

"  I  would  not  believe  the  gospel,  if  the  authority  of  the  Catholic  church  did 
not  mo-ve  me  thereto." 

Will  Mr.  Pope  show  me,  that  he  does  not  deviate  from  the 
living  authority  of  the  Catholic  church?  I  defy  him  to  do  so. 
He  appeals,  indeed,  to  an  invisible  church — he  quotes  a  text  of 
scripture  to  prove,  that  where  two  or  three  are  gathered  in  the 
Lord's  name,  there  will  he  be  in  the  midst  of  them.  This  is 
no  new  doctrine.  There  our  Lord  speaks  of  private  prayer.— 
The  Apostles  command  all  to  believe  in  the  holy  Catholic  church. 
There  never  existed  a  time  since  the  Apostles  in  which  that  holy 
Catholic  church  was  not  visible  on  earth,  otherwise  the  Apostles 
would  have  bound  us  to  believe  in  a  church  of  whose  existence 
there  was  no  certainty. 

Let  Mr.  Pope  reconcile  the  idea  of  a  Universal  church,  to 
tl:at  of  two  or  three  being  assembled  in  Christ's  name,  or  let 

4 


88  THE    INFALLIBILITY  OP 

him  show  that  two  or  three  establish  our  notion  of  universality. 
Mr.  Pope  in  vain  appeals  to  his  invisible  church.  This  is  an 
argument  which  would  delight  our  infidels.  The  Jew  may  say 
to  the  Christian-—"  vhrist  made  great  promises  to  his  church 
according  to  your  account — he  declared,  the  gates  of  hell  should 
not  prevad  against  her — and  he  said,  that  whoever  should  not 
hear  her,  should  be  condemned  ;  he  also  compared  her  to  a  city 
built  upon  a  mountain.  Yet,  we  find  that  he  has  not  fulfilled 
his  promises — that  his  church  may  fail — that  the  gates  of  hell 
have  prevailed  against  her — that  the  spirit  of  God  has  departed 
from  her,  and  that  the  promises  of  visibility  have  been  shame- 
fuliy  violated.  It  is  then  necessary  for  you  to  look  out  for  that 
Messiah,  whose  coming  we  daily  expect."  These  arguments 
might  be  used  against  the  man  who  admits,  that  a  time  did  exist, 
since  the  coming  of  Christ,  when  there  was  no  visible  church 
upon  earth.  With  regard  to  the  authorities  which  I  have  pro- 
duced from  the  holy  Fathers,  I  have  quoted  from  them  where 
they  expressly  treat  of  the  authority  of  the  church — I  do  no| 
select  passages  from  them  v,'here  they  allude  to  the  church,  mere-', 
ly  by  a  side  wind,  and  which  passages  prove  nothing  upon  the 
spbjoct.  Mr.  Pope  calls  upon  me  to  produce  a  genuine  infal- 
lible translation  of  the  Bible — that  is  to  be  found  in  our  church, 
which  is  not  in  his.  We  have  the  Latin  vulgate,  the  noblf^ 
translation  of  St.  Jerome,  and  approved  of  by  the  council  ot 
Trent — that  is  our  acknowledged  and  authentic  Bible.  I  retort 
upon  Mr.  Pope — I  call  upon  him  to  show  rne  any  translation  in 
his  church,  that  can  be  said  to  be  infallible.  The  Protestant 
church  is  fallible — the  translators  of  their  Bible  were  fallible — 
and  the  man  who  reads  it  is  fallible.  How  can  certainty  be 
built  upon  uncertainty  ?  How  can  infallibility  proceed  from 
fallibilities,  or  to  use  an  expression  of  a  great  dignitary  of  the 
Established  church,  "  How  can  an  immoveable  edifice  be  built 
upon  a  moveable  foundation  1  " 

Let  Mr.  Pope  answer  that  argument  if  he  can  ;  a  child  who 
is  born  in  Mr.  Pope's  communion  must  remain  a  Deist  till  he 
has  arrived  at  the  years  of  discretion.  A  Bible  is  then  put  into 
his  hands.  I  will  admit  that  he  is  conscious  of  the  existence  of 
a  God — All  his  works  proclaim  it.  "  Coeli  enarrant  gloriam 
Dei."  But  he  can  never  ascertain  of  himself,  from  the  book 
put  into  his  hands,  the  religion  which  God  has  ordained.  He 
must  learn  that  from  his  Clergy  or  from  Mr.  Pope — I  respect 
the  Protestant  Clergy — I  acknowledge  they  possess  the  titulus 
coloratus.  Mr.  Pope,  I  should  remaik,  is  not  sent,  and  St.  Paul 
tells  us  that  no  one  is  to  preach  who  is  not  called  as  Aaron  was 
— "And  how  can  they  preach  unless  they  be  sent."  The  Pro- 
testant child,  when  the  Bible  is  put  into  his  hands  cannot  believe 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  39 

in  the  infallibility  of  the  translator — he  cannot  tLke  the  scrip- 
tures upon  the  authority  of  the  Catholic  church,  he  must  disbe- 
lieve them  altogether.  The  Protestant  Clergy  should  beware 
of  the  principles  so  confidently  put  forth  at  the  present  period, 
and  to  which  they  lend  their  countenance  and  support.  If  every 
individual  is  to  be  constituted  interpreter  of  the  scriptures,  the 
day  will  arrive  when  the  clergy  will  be  thrown  overboard,  and 
they  will  be  glad  to  fly  from  the  machinations  of  those  who  would 
make  every  old  woman  in  the  country  an  interpreter  and  ex- 
pounder of  the  sacred  word  of  God. 

When  Mr.  Pope  takes  the  Bible  into  his  hands,  he  should 
prove  that  it  is  inspire.d.  Granting  that  he  establishes  its  authen- 
ticity, he  has  done  nothing,  if  he  cannot  prove  its  inspiration.  I 
defy  him  to  do  so  upon  his  own  principles,  without  being  enclos- 
ed in  a  vicious  circle.  He  receives  the  scriptures  upon  the  righ* 
of  private  judgment,  and  he  then  proves  the  divine  right  of  pr*. 
vate  judgment  from  the  scriptures.  With  regard  to  general 
councils,  he  wishes  to  know  how  many  have  been  recognised  in 
the  church.  If  I  be  not  able  at  this  moment  to  state  with  nu- 
merical certainty  the  councils  which  are  received,  he  will  con- 
clude that  the  church  is  not  infallible.  I  tell  him  there  have 
been  eighteen  ecumenical  councils,  whose  definitions  on  articles 
of  faith  are  held  to  be  infallible.  If  Mr.  Pope  proves  that  any 
of  the  ecumenical  councils  have  sanctioned  any  thing  which 
contradicts  the  faith  of  the  Catholic  church,  that  indeed  would 
be  something  like  an  unanswerable  argument.  He  says  that 
some  councils  are  received  in  one  diocess,  and  others  in  another. 

There  never  was  an  ecumenical  councilheld,  but  its  doctrines 
were  immediately  received  throughout  the  church.  But  it  is  not 
so  with  regard  to  local  discipline.  We  affirm  that  it  would  be 
scandalous  and  unchristian  to  break  communion,  on  account  of 
differences  in  what  is  called  local  discipline.  Mr.  Pope  dissents 
from  the  church  of  England,  either  in  essentials,  or  he  does  not. 
If  he  differ  in  essentials,  then  there  is  no  union  in  the  Protes- 
tant churches.  But  if  his  cause  of  difference  be  not  essential, 
he  rends  the  seamless  garment  of  Christ — he  goes  out  of  the 
ark  of  Noah  without  necessity,  and  separates  without  excuse 
from  that  general  society  of  men — the  Protestant  chuich,  and 
thus  becomes  a  factious  and  dangerous  member  of  society.-— 
What  says  the  Apostle  Paul? 

"  I  beseech  that  you  walk  worthy  of  the  vocation  in  which  you  are  called, 
with  all  humihty  and  mildness,  with  patience,  supporting  one  another  in 
charity,  careful  to  keep  the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace.  One 
body  and  one  spirit ;  as  you  are  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling.  One 
Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above  all, 
wad  through  all,  and  in  us  all." — Epistle  to  the  EphesianSy  iv,  L  2,  3,  4,  5,  & 


40  THE     INFALLIBILITY    OF 

Are  aifferences  allowed  here  ?  Is  the  conduct  of  the  heretics 
and  reformers  justified  by  this  passage?  They  all  set  up  their 
right  of  private  judgment, — Arius,  Luther,  Calvin,  GEcolampadiua 
and  Zuinglius,  the  last  of  whom  affirms,  that  in  the  words 
"  this  is  my  body,"  the  verb  "  is  "  was  used  by  Christ  for 
REPRESENTS,  Contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  Luther,  by  whom  he 
was  excommunicated. 

The  church  of  England  says  that  good  works  are  necessary  ; 
Mr.  Pope  denies  that  they  are.  Baptism  with  the  sign  of  the 
cross  is  received  in  the  church  of  England.  Will  he  show  me 
any  authority  from  Scripture  for  that  1  We  are  told  in  scripture 
to  keep  holy  the  Sabbath  day — Mr.  Pope  violates  that  com- 
mandment, by  changing  its  object;  or  he  must  admit,  that  all 
things  appertaining  to  salvation  are  not  contained  in  the 
scriptures.  He  still  sophistically  endeavors  to  raise  a  difference 
between  the  church  of  Rome  and  the  Catholic  church.  But  I 
have  shown  from  St.  Augustin  and  many  other  Fathers,  that 
the  church  of  Christ  is  none  other  than  the  various  Christian 
churches  throughout  the  world  in  communion  with  the  church 
of  Rome,  Mr.  Pope  quotes  St.  Paul,  to  show  that  the  promises 
of  Christ  to  his  church  were  conditional.  'Tis  well  he  admits 
that  the  promises  were  made,  and  it  were  better  had  he  riot 
attempted  to  prove  them  conditional.  St.  Paul,  writing  to  the 
Gentiles  dispersed  at  Rome,  and  who  had  been  received  into  the 
church,  warns  them  against  vainly  boasting  of  their  election,  and 
their  having  been  preferred  to  the  Jews.  He  tells  them  not  to 
cjlory  against  the  branches  (meaning  the  Jews)  who  had  been 
cut  off  through  their  incredulity,  but  rather  to  persevere  in 
righteousness  lest  they  should  be  cut  off,  and  the  Jews  again 
engrafted.  "If  thou  continue  in  his  goodness  (says  he,)  otherwise 
thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off." 

Mr.  Pope  rose  and  said, — My  friend  has  touched  on  several 
topics,  which  more  properly  belong  to  the  question  to  be  dis- 
cussed to-morrow.  I  shall,  therefore,  for  the  present  pass  them 
by,  and  proceed  at  once  to  my  subject.  He  says  that  our 
Saviour  did  not  give  any  command  to  write  the  scriptures.  But 
if  the  sacred  scriptures  were  not  written  by  the  command  of 
God,  then  they  cannot  be  inspired.  He  says,  that  I  cannot  show 
him  any  passages  in  the  Bible,  in  which  such  a  command  is 
given — In  the  book  of  Exodus,  xvii,  14,  Douay  version,  I  read. 

"  And  the  Lord  said  to  Moses;  write  this  for  a  memorial  in  a  book,  and 
deliver  it  to  the  ears  of  Josue,  for  I  will  destroy  the  memory  of  Amalec  from 
under  heaven." 

Again,  in  the  101  psalm. — "Let  these  things  he  ivritten  unto  anothiv 
generation.'' 


THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CHURCH.  41 

In  the  30th  Isaiah,  8  verse. — "  Now,  therefore,  go  in  and  write  for  them 

npon  box,  and  note  it  diligently  in  a  book,  and  it  shall  he  in  the  latter  days  f of 

a  testimony  for  ever^ 

Ezekiel,  xliii,  11. — "  Show  them  the  form  of  the  house,  and  of  the  fashion 

thereof,  the  goings-out,  and  the  cominf '|S  in,  and  the  whole  plan  thereof,  and 

all  its  ordinances,  and  all  its  order,  and  all  its  laws  ;  and  thou  shalt  write  it  in 

their  sight,  that  they  may  keep  the  whole  form  thereof,  and  its  ordinances, 

and  do  them." 

Hab.  ii,  2. — "  And  the  Lord  answered  me,  and  said :  write  the  vision  and 

nvake  it  plain  upon  tables :  that  he  that  readeth  it,  may  run  over  ity 

Rev.  i,  11. — "What  thou  sayest,  write  in  a  book:  and  send  to  the  seven 

churches  which  are  in  Asia." 

19t.h  verse  of  the  same  chapter. — "  Write  therefore  the  things  which  thou 

hast  seen,  and  which  are,  and  which  must  be  done  hereafter." 
Chap,  ii,  1. — "Unto  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Ephesus,  i«n/c." 
8  verse. — "And  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Smyrna,  lunie." 
12  verse. — "  And  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Pergamus,  writer 
18  verse. — "  And  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Thyatira,  wnte." 
3  chap.  1st  verse. — "  And  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Sardis,  writej^ 
7  verse. — "And  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Philadelphia,  write.^^ 
14  verse. — "And  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Laodicea,  lorite.     These 

thmgs  saith  the  Amen,  the  faithful  and  true  witness,  who  is  the  beginning  of 

the  creation  of  God." 

Here  then  are  the  express  commands  of  our  Saviour  himself, 
for  writing  at  least  particular  portions  of  the  word  of  God.  We 
shall  now  see  what  are  the  opinions  of  Fathers  upon  the  subject. 
St.  Augustin,  de  Consens.  Evang.  hb.  i,  cap,  7,  says, 

"This  first  is  to  be  discussed,  which  some  are  accustomed  to  objict  to — 
why  the  Lord  himself  wrote  nothing  ?     Pagans  chiefly  start  this  objection." 

And  further,  in  the  same  book  and  25th  chap,  he  says : 

"When  they  (meaning  the  evangelists)  wrote  what  he  showed  and  said, 
t  is  by  no  means  to  be  inferred,  that  he  himself  did  not  wnte ;  since  he  as  the 
nead,  dictated  what  his  members  put  down  ;  for  whatsoever  he  wished  that 
we  should  know  of  his  deeds  or  sayings,  he  commanded  to  be  written  as  by 
lis  own  hands." 

And  Gregory  the  Great  (in  Praefat.  in  lib.  Job.) 

"If  having  received  letters  from  some  great  man,  we  read  the  words,  and 
should  demand  with  what  pen  these  words  were  written :  this,  indeed,  would 
be  most  ridiculous,  to  trouble  ourselves  inquiring,  not  so  much  who  was  the 
author?  or  what  was  his  name  ?  as  with  what  pen  the  words  were  written  ?" 
"  When,  therefore,  we  believe  the  substance  of  the  letters,  and  acknowledge 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  be  the  author  of  the  matter,  if  we  should  set  about  inquiring 
for  the  scribe,  what  else  are  we  doing  than,  if  after  reading  letters  we  should 
vainly  trouble  our  heads  about  the  pen  they  were  written  with." 

And  the  same  author  says  (Epist.  lib.  iv,  indict,  xii,  ep.  31. 
Paris,  1705,) 

"What  are  the  holy  scriptures,  but  a  certain  epistle  from  the  omnipotent 
God  to  his  creatures." 

And  Athanasius,  in  Rescript  ad  Liber,  torn,  i,  speaking  of 
Christ,  says : 

"  He  it  is  who  has  spoken  by  the  prophets — He  it  is  who  has  composed  kba 
Old  and  New  Testament." 

4* 


42  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

My  i3arned  friend  made  some  observations  on  the  quotation 
from  Dupin.  The  opinions  of  Dupin  are  clear  and  distinct  upon 
the  subject ;  and  you  have  only  to  contrast  his  observations  with 
those  of  my  friet  d,  to  convince  you,  that  the  Roman  Catholic 
church  was  not  in  primitive  times  acknowledged  as  the  universal 
church.  He  also  referred  to  that  passage  in  the  creed  where  it 
is  said,  '*  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  church."  The  creed, 
I  admit,  is  an  ancient  document ;  and  were  I  even  to  grant  that 
it  was  penned  by  the  Apostles,  Mr.  Maguire  need  not  have  given 
h»mself  the  trouble  of  proving,  that  the  universal  church  of  Christ 
was  called  the  Catholic  church.  I  admit  this  at  once;  but  I 
deny  as  distinctly  that  this  term  applied  to  the  church  of  Rome  ; 
and  until  Mr.  Maguire  proves  this,  I  maintain  that  his  other 
arguments  go  for  nothing.  I  know  my  friend  attaches  great 
importance  to  the  authority  of  the  Fathers,  and  I  shall  now  allude 
to  a  passage  from  TertuUian  which  was  referred  to  in  my  lettei 
to  Mr.  Maguire.  In  order  to  secure  Christians  in  true  doctrine, 
he  recommends  them  to  consult  the  Apostolic  churches,  men- 
tioning the  churches  of  Corinth,  of  Philippi,  of  Thessalonica, 
and  of  Ephesus,  as  well  as  of  Rome. — TertuL  de  proescrip.  aa 
Hizr,  §  14.,  p.  108,  109. 

Now  I  would  ask,  had  TertuUian  considered  that  the  church 
of  Rome  was  the  universal  church,  or  that  she  maintained  an 
authority  over  other  churches,  would  he  have  written  thus  ? 
Would  he  have  spoken  af  other  churches  in  the  same  strain  in 
v»'hich  he  speaks  of  the  church  of  Rome — had  he  considered 
her  as  the  supreme  or  universal  church?  Truly  TertuUian  did 
not  place  her  in  so  high  a  rank  as  my  friend  would  have  us  to 
suppose.  In  relation  to  this  passage  which  I  have  quoted, 
the  Roman  Catholic  writer,  Beatus  Rhenanus  remarks,  that 
"if  TertuUian  were  to  utter  such  a  sentiment  in  his  day,  relative 
to  the  church  of  Rome,  he  would  not  escape  punishment." 
Rhenan.  Argum.  in  Tert.  de  Prsec.  et  alibi.  Impres.  Basil, 
1521.  I  could  multiply  many  quotations  from  the  Fathers  to  the 
same  purport,  but  that  I  wish  to  occupy  my  time  ivith  other  matter. 

In  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  it  was  decreed,  that  equal 
respect  should  be  paid  to  the  Bishops  of  Constantinople  and 
Rome.  And  I  would  ask,  can  any  thing  more  distinctly  prove, 
that  the  church  of  Rome  was  not  in  the  earlier  ages  looked 
upon  exclusively  the  church  of  Christ?  Or  can  any  thing 
more  directly  contradict  the  assumption  of  universal  authority 
claimed  by  that  church  ?  But  I  would  also  ask  my  friend,  if 
the  church  of  Rome  was  in  the  first  ages  considered  as  the  su- 
preme or  universal  church,  how  does  it  happen,  that  the  Apostle 
Paul  addressed  epistles  to  several  churches  without  the  most 
distant  reference  to  the  authority  of  the  church  of  Rom.e ;  and 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  43 

that,  in  the  epistle  which  he  addressed  to  the  church  cf  Rome, 
he  does  not  make  the  most  indirect  allusion  to  her  heing  the 
Catholic  or  supreme  Church,  much  less  to  her  possessing  the 
prerogative  of  infallibility '?  Nor  is  the  epistle  even  addressed 
to  Peter,  who  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  Bishop  of  Rome. 
On  the  contrary,  we  find  the  epistle  addressed  "  to  all,"  (mark 
that)  "  to  all  that  are  at  Rome,  the  beloved  of  God,  called  to  be 
saints."  There  is  not  one  word,  you  perceive,  about  the 
boasted  supremacy  of  that  Church — nor  the  least  mention  of 
the  Apostle  Peter.  It  is  addressed  to  all  those  who  composed 
the  church  of  Christ  in  that  city.  Where,  then,  I  would  ask,  is 
there  the  slightest  ground  of  argument  to  show  that  the  church 
of  Rome  was  the  supreme  church  ?  I  assert,  that  Mr.  Maguire 
has  not  established  his  opinion  on  this  subject ;  while  on  the 
contrary,  it  must  be  evident  to  every  one  present,  from  the  pas- 
sages which  I  have  quoted  from  scripture,  and  from  the  Fathers 
also,  that  no  such  doctrine  was  entertained  in  the  first  ages  of 
the  church.  My  friend  has  brought  forward  the  word  "  con- 
substantial,"  to  show  that  words  have  been  introduced,  which 
are  not  to  be  found  in  scripture  ;  and  argues  that  the  term 
Roman  Catholic  may  be  also  admitted,  though  not  found  ii> 
sacred  writ.  I  allow  that  there  are  many  words  used  by  theolo- 
gians which  are  not  to  be  found  in  scripture,  but  deny  that  this 
makes  for  his  argument.  The  terms  which  theologians  use,  do 
not  contradict  themselves  ;  but  I  appeal  to  common  sense,  is 
there  not  an  evident  contradiction  in  the  term  Roman  Catholic  ? 
To  speak  of  a  particular  universal,  I  maintain,  is  absurd — 
"  Where  the  true  church  was  before  Luther,"  and  the  Pope's 
supremacy,  I  shall  consider,  when  we  come  to  the  question  of 
the  Reformation. 

My  friend  has  referred  to  the  passage  which  I  quoted  from 
St.  Augustin,  pointing  out  the  method  by  which  we  might  dis- 
cover the  true  church  of  Christ.  I  confess  that  I  was  not  a 
little  surprised  at  his  commentary  on  that  passage.  If,  however, 
he  admits  that  St.  Augustin  held  that  the  scriptures  were  to  be 
referred  to  in  contentions  with  reputed  heretics, — as  the  church 
of  Rome  considers  me  a  heretic,  she  should  condescend  to  refer 
me  for  the  discovery  of  the  marko  of  the  true  church  to  the 
same  authority.  St.  Augustin  again  says,  "I  am  unwilling 
that  the  church  be  demonstrated  by  hu'nan  documents  but  by 
divine  oracles." — {De  Unitat.  Eccles.  c.  3.) 

I  did  not  cite  **  where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in 
my  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them,"  to  prove  the  invisi- 
bility of  the  church  of  Christ; — nor  did  I  argue  that  two  or 
three  constituted  the  universal  church.  What  I  said  was,  that 
the  church  of  Christ,  or  the  universal  church,  consisted  of  i/u 


44  THE     INFALLIBILITT     OF 

entire  body  of  the  faithful,  however  scattered  over  the  world, — 
and  the  Great  Head  of  the  Church  had  promised,  that  wnere- 
ever  two  or  three  were  assembled  together  in  his  name  he 
would  be  with  them  to  bless  them  and  to  preside  over  them. 
My  friend  has  alluded  to  the  promise  made  by  Christ,  "  he  shall 
guide  you  into  all  truth."  But  he  should  remember,  that  whil/^, 
some  of  the  promises  refer  to  the  great  body  of  those  who  com- 
pose the  church  of  Christ,  others  were  intended  especially  for 
the  Apostles.  In  a  succeeding  chapter  we  find  Christ  promised 
the  Comforter,  "  to  bring  to  their  remembrance  all  that  he  haa 
spoken.^^  We  cannot  say  that  we  heard  Christ  speak  viva  voce, 
as  the  Apostles  did.  And  therefore  it  will  be  seen,  that  thei 
are  some  of  the  promises  which  cannot  apply  to  any  but  to 
them.  My  friend  says,  "  he  was  quits  with  me  on  the  Fathers." 
Now,  I  affirm,  that  the  passages  which  I  quoted  from  their 
writings,  went  distinctly  to  prove,  that  in  the  early  ages,  neither 
the  infallibility,  the  supremacy,  nor  the  uuiversahty  of  the 
church  of  Rome  was  acknowledged.  Should  I  grant,  however, 
that  Mr.  Maguire  "  was  quits  with  me,  in  reference  to  the 
Fathers,"  what  does  the  concession  amount  to?  That  we  have 
Fathers  against  Fathers — and  hov/  shall  we  in  the  midst  of 
such  uncertainty,  if  we  depend  on  them,  be  able  to  come  to  any 
specific  conclusion  ?  I  therefore  do  trust,  that  the  result  of  the 
present  discussion  may  be,  that  we  shall  throw  the  Fathers  over- 
board, and  sailing  in  the  ark  of  the  living  God,  his  holy  scrip- 
tures, launch  out  upon  the  great  ocean  of  religious  truth.  My 
friend  has  said,  that  the  version  of  the  scriptures  which  contains 
the  pure  word  of  God,  is  that  translated  by  Jerome,  and  sanc- 
tioned by  the  council  of  Trent.  The  council  of  Trent  pro- 
nounced an  edition  of  the  Yulgate,  that  was  afterwards  to  be 
published  "  quam  emendatissime,"  as  correctly  as  possible — the 
standard  edition.  She  pronounced  a  verdict  upon  an  edition  at 
the  time,  in  utero,  that  had  not  seen  the  hght.  An  edition  of 
the  Yulgate  was  published  by  the  Louvain  doctors,  about  thirty 
years  after  the  council  of  Trent.  Pope  Sixtus  V.  not  approv- 
ing of  this  edition,  and  wishing  for  a  still  more  correct  one,  with 
great  trouble  brought  together  many  learned  Je  A'ish  and  Roman 
Catholic  doctors — the  Yulgate  was  compared  with  the  Greek 
and  Hebrew  originals,  and  the  edition  was  completed.  Sixtus 
considered  it  so  perfect,  that  in  his  preface  he  declared,  that 
any  one  who  should  attempt  to  alter  it  "  in  minimi  particul^," 
should  be  subject  to  the  major  excommunication.  Within 
three  years  after  the  publication  of  this  immaculate  and  infallible 
edition,  written  as  it  was  in  a  dead  language,  and  therefore  less 
liable  to  suflfer  from  the  variations  to  which  a  living  language  is 
subject,  another  made  its  appearance  virider  the  sanction   of 


THE    ROMAN    CAniOLIC    CHURCH.  45 

Pope  Clement  YTIL  And  what  think  you  1  Notwithstanding 
the  anathema  which  Pope  Sixtus  had  pronounced  on  the  indi- 
vidual who  should,  "  in  minimal  particulgl,"  in  the  least  particle, 
alter  the  edition  published  by  him,  it  has  been  ascertained,  that 
there  were  in  the  edition  pubUshed  by  Clement  YIII,  no  fewer 
than  20 CO  variations  from  the  text  of  the  Sixtine  edition.  Dr. 
James  has  proved  the  existence  of  these  differences  between 
the  Clementine  and  Sixtine  editions,  in  his  work  entitled  Bellunri 
Paple.  Now,  I  would  ask  my  learned  friend,  from  which  of 
these  editions  has  the  version,  which  he  represents  to  be  so  im- 
maculate, been  taken  ]  I  answer,  from  the  Clementine  edition 
and  not  from  the  Sixtine.  So  that  Pope  Clement  VIII,  and  the 
Douay  translators  have  incurred  the  penalty  pronounced  in  tha 
preface  of  the  Sixtine  edition — have  subjected  themselves  to 
2000  majores  excommunicationes.  But  this  is  not  all.  In  the 
successive  editions  of  the  Douay  version  are  to  be  found  many 
discrepancies.  If  the  present  edition,  of  whose  correctness  my 
learned  friend  has  made  such  unwarrantable  boast,  be  com- 
pared with  the  Clementine  and  Sixtine  editions,  it  will  be  found 
to  differ  not  only  from  both  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine,  but 
also  from  preceding  editions  of  itself,  as  Mr.  Hamilton  has 
clearly  shown.  I  should  mention  that  Clement  bought  up  the 
Sixtine  copies  to  guard,  if  possible,  his  predecessor  from  the 
charge  of  fallibility ;  so  that  but  two  copies,  I  believe,  are  ex- 
tant. Thus,  we  have  Pope  against  Pope,  and  doctor  against 
doctor.  I  again  ask  my  friend  to  produce  a  perfect  and  im- 
maculate copy  of  the  scriptures.  I  have  shown  you  that  he 
cannot  do  so.  Then  we  have  to  charge  his  infallible  church, 
either  with  having  failed  in  her  duty  towards  her  people,  in  not 
having  provided  a  perfect  edition  of  God's  holy  word ;  or,  on 
the  other  hand,  with  inability  to  produce  such  a  translation  of 
the  scriptures.  Let  my  friend  adopt  either  alternative  ;  and  I 
ask,  what  becomes  of  the  boasted  infallibility  of  his  church  ? 
He  desired  me  to  produce  a  perfect  version  of  the  Bible — I 
affirm,  that  although  we  do  not  boast  of  infallibility,  we  have  a 
better  version  of  the  scriptures  than  his  church  can  produce.  I 
need  not  here  occupy  your  time  in  speaking  of  the  extreme 
pains  and  care,  which  were  taken  by  men  of  the  greatest  talenta 
and  research,  in  preparing  the  present  authorised  version. 

Dr.  Geddes,  who  was,  at  least  at  one  period  of  his  life,  a 
Roman  Catholic  priest,  a  man  of  considerable  literary  attain- 
ments, has  spoken  of  the  Protestant  Bible  in  terms  of  the  great- 
est commendation.     He  observes, — 

"  The  highest  eulogiiims  have  been  made  on  the  translation  of  James  I, 
both  by  our  own  writers  and  by  foreigners.  And,  indeed,  if  accuracy, 
fidelity,  and  tlie  strictest  attention  to  the  letter  of  ttc  text,  be  supposed  tc 


4B  THE  INFALLISILITY    OP 

form  the  qualifications  of  an  excellent  version,  this,  of  all  versic.is^  must  m 
general  be  accounted  the  most  excellent.  Every  sentence,  every  v/oni, 
every  syllable,  every  letter  and  point,  seem  to  have  been  weighed  with  the 
nicest  exactitude,  and  expressed,  either  in  the  text,  or  margin,  with  the 
greatest  precision.  Pagnmus  himself  is  hardly  more  literal ;  and  it  was 
well  observed  by  Robinson,  above  100  years  ago,  that  *it  may  serve  for  a 
lexicon  of  the  Hebrew  language  as  well  as  for  a  translation.' " 

Hear  the  opmion  of  the  celebrated  J.  K.  L.*  on  the  subject. 
lie  says,  "  The  authorised  version  is  a  noble  work,  with  all  its 
faults.'^  We  see,  therefore,  from  the  testimony  of  Roman 
Catholics,  that  our  version  of  the  scriptures  is  truly  excellent ; 
and  in  confirmation  of  its  great  value,  I  beg  to  remark,  that 
each  succeeding  edition  of  the  Douay  Bible  approximates 
nearer  and  nearer  to  the  Protestant  version.  And  is  not  this 
circumstance  an  acknowledgment,  that  the  Protestant  version  is 
considered,  even  by  the  Roman  Catholic  hierarchy,  as  more 
accurate  than  their  own  ? 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  deny  that  our  bible  has  approximated  to 
the  English  edition.  I  deny  the  fact — let  Mr.  Pope  prove  it,  and 
then  show  how,  and  in  v/hat  manner,  it  has  been  effected.  The 
apostle  St.  John  is  desired  to  write  what  he  has  seen  "  in  a  book, 
and  send  it  to  the  seven  churches  which  are  in  Asia,  to  Ephesus, 
and  Smyrna,  and  to  Pergamos,  and  to  Thyatira,  and  to  Sardis, 
and  to  Philadelphia,  and  to  Laodicea."  So  far  the  apostle  is 
commanded  to  write  to  the  particular  bishops  of  particular 
churches,  conveying  particular  information.  But  from  this  a 
general  conclusion  is  drawn  by  Mr.  Pope  that  our  Saviour  com- 
manded the  New  Testament  to  be  written.  The  Apostle  is 
commanded  to  write  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Ephesus,  and 
from  this  Mr.  Pope  draws  the  unjust  and  illogical  conclusion, 
that  a  positive  commandment  has  been  given  to  write  the  New 
Testament.  I  come  now  to  his  argument  drawn  from  the  Six- 
tine  and  Clementine  editions  of  the  Bible.  I  may  premise  that 
the  Pope's  infallibility  is  not  a  doctrine  of  mine,  nor  of  any 
Catholic.  There  are  differences  on  the  subject  between  the 
French  and  ultra  Montanists,  but  they  are  merely  the  private 
opinions  of  private  divines.  The  church  has  pronounced  no 
opinion  on  it.  The  church  only  pronounces  on  essentials.  It 
leaves  the  human  mind  free  to  discuss  other  subjects  respecting 
which  infallibility  does  not  shut  out  inquiry— but  the  authority 
of  the  church  is  decisive  in  articles  of  faith,  which  cannot  be 
ascertained  by  human  power.  How  could  the  mass  of  man- 
kind be  able  to  judge  of  the  truth  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
or  of  justification  by  faith  ?  how  could  they  reconcile  with  a 
just  God  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  ]     And  what  is  the  human 

*  Right  Reverend  James  Doyle,  Bishop  of  Kildare  and  L^igbJin, 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  47 

mind  ?  Is  not  the  great  mass  of  mankind  composed  of  the  ig- 
norant and  lower  orders  ?  It  is  only  when  every  man  is  allowed 
to  read  and  interpret  the  Bible,  that 

"  A  little  learning  is  a  dangerous  thing." 
Christianity  is  thrown  overboard,  and  the  church  of  Christ  is 
scoffed  at.  It  was  by  such  means  that  infidelity  spread  through- 
out France  and  Germany.  It  is  our  duty  to  read  the  Bible,  but 
it  must  be  under  proper  circumstances.  I  love  the  Bible — I 
read  the  Bible — I  believe  it  to  be  the  infallible  Word  of  God. 
Christ  will  not  allow  his  children  to  use  good  food,  when,  b} 
the  circumstances  of  the  case,  it  might  be  converted  into  poison. 
Would  you  give  to  a  child  food  of  an  indigestible  quality?  The 
Catholic  church,  knowing  from  experience  the  danger  of  an  in- 
discriminate perusal  of  th«  scriptures,  directs  that  the  sacred 
volume  should  not  be  read  by  any  who  want  the  due  disposition. 
The  Catholic  church  is  right  in  resisting  the  indiscriminate 
reading  of  the  scriptures.  If  the  Bible  be  at  all  imperfect,  as 
Mr.  Pope  has  been  endeavouring  to  prove  it,  that  would  be  a 
strong  argument  that  it  should  not  be  put  into  the  hands  of  the 
ignorant  and  illiterate  without  due  caution.  Mr.  Pope  quotes 
the  authority  of  Pope  Sixtus,  that  the  scriptures  shall  not  be 
altered  from  his  edition,  "  7ie  in  minima  pariicula,^'' 

The  Catholic  divines,  who  wrote  the  catechism  of  the  court- 
ed, state,  that  Catholic  doctrine  shall  not  be  changed  ne  in 
minima  parlicula.  Allusion  is  here  made  by  the  Pope  to  the 
faith  conveyed  in  the  book,  and  not  to  matters  of  discipline. 
In  faith  we  yield  to  the  authority  of  the  church,  which,  as  the 
holy  Fathers  say,  is  the  solution  of  ail  difficulties.  I  will  here 
call  on  Mr.  Pope  to  compare  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine  editions 
of  the  Bible  with  the  Latin  Vulgate,  and  see  if  he  can  find  an)' 
thing  in  them  as  to  substance  and  faith  different.  He  talks  of 
his  Bible — it  has  undergone  more  substantial  changes  than  any 
book  in  the  world.  There  have  been  upwards  of  7000  correc- 
tions made  by  Dr.  Mills.  Dr.  Wharton  was  charged  with 
|)romoting  infidelity,  having  made  such  a  skeleton  of  the  Bible. 
Ward  has  proved  the  numerous  corruptions  in  the  Protestant 
Bible.  Take  an  example — in  the  nineteenth  chapter  of  Num- 
bers, Moses  is  directed  to  take  the  ashes  of  a  heifer  that  has  been 
sacrificed,  and  to  sprinkle  them  with  the  water  of  expiation — 
lest  this  text  might  go  to  sanction  holy  water,  it  is  translated  the 
*'  water  of  separation"  in  the  Protestant  Bible — although  in  all 
ancient  copies,  it  is  either  the  water  of  lustration,  purification, 
or  aspersion.  "  A  man,"  says  Dr.  Wall,  another  restorer  of 
the  Protestant  Bible,  •'  cannot  forbear  having  a  strong  stomach 
against  our  translators,  who,  with  all  the  ancient  copies  before 
them,  must  nevertheless  go  astray." 


48  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OP 

Luther,  quoting  the  words  of  St.  Paul, 

"  For  we  believe  that  a  man  may  be  saved  by  faith,  without  the  works  of 
the  law,"  (alluding  to  the  Jewish  law)  adds  to  the  text  the  word  '  only  j'  in 
the  German  *  allein.^ 

And  when  upbraided  with  this  sacrilegious  addition,  he  replied, 

**  Am  I  not  an  apostle,  as  well  as  Paul — and  should  any  Papist  object  to 
the  word  onhj,  immediately  oppose  to  him  the  loill  of  Dr.  Martin  Luther,  who 
is  a  doctor  above  all  Popish  doctors,  and  who  asserts,  that  the  Pope  and  an 
ass  are  synonymous  terms  —quid  unum  et  idem.'''' 

I  hold  myself  responsible  for  the  Yulgate.  I  challenge  him 
to  show  me  a  material  error  in  that  translation.  I  receive  it 
upon  the  authority  of  an  infallible  church.  Mr.  Pope  will 
acknowledge  no  authority — he  sets  up  his  opinion  not  only  against 
the  Catholic,  but  against  the  Protestant  churches.  The  Catho- 
lic church  has  preserved  the  authentic  copy  of  the  scriptures — 
from  it  the  Protestant  church  has  received  it.  Mr.  Pope, 
however,  denies  any  church  possesses  any  authority  to  which 
any  man  is  obliged  to  yield.  I  shall  read  to  you  a  passage 
from  St.  Chrysostom.     He  says, — 

"If  you  wage  war  against  man  you  may  conquer,  or  be  overcome  ;  no 
force  shall  overcome  the  church.  The  church  is  much  stronger  than  the 
earth — even  stronger  than  heaven — for  '  Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  uway,' 
(Luke  xxi,  33.)  What  words  are  these,  ^the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
ugainst  her  7''  (Matt,  xvi,  18.)  But  if  you  doubt  the  word — give  credit  to 
facts.  How  many  tyrants  have  assailed  ^he  church  of  God — how  many 
torments — what  persecutions — what  fires?  They  could  effect  nothing." 
Homihj  de  Expulsione  sua,  tome  iv,  p.  843. 

And  in  his  Homily,  "  Quod  Christus  sit  deus-!'^  tome  v,  chap. 
11 — he  says, — 

"  *  On  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church.' — (Matt,  xvi,  18.)  Consider  what 
this  means,  and  you  will  discover  its  evident  truth,  for  it  is  not  alone  wonder- 
ful that  Christ  built  his  church  in  all  parts  of  the  earth,  but  that  he  rendered 
her  impregnable,  and  invincible  against  all  attacks — *  The  gates  of  hell  shall 
not  prevail  against  her' — that  is,  no  danger — not  those  that  produce  death, 
and  lead  to  hell.  Have  you  witnessed  this  prediction?  Have  you  beheld 
the  certainty  and  strength  of  the  event  ?  Have  you  seen  the  words  njanifesLod 
in  the  fact,  and  the  power,  which  without  arms  accomplished  all  things  ?" 

I  now  come  again  to  the  distinction  which  Mr.  Pope  has  en- 
deavoured to  draw  between  the  Catholic  church  and  the  Roman 
Catho'c  church — it  is  a  mere  play  upon  words  ;  the  Fathers, 
he  asserts,  did  not  allow  the  church  of  Rome  to  be  the  Catholic 
church.  I  have  already  told  you,  that  in  consequence  of  the 
separation  of  the  Greek  church,  and  the  heresy  of  the  Arians, 
the  Catholic  church  was  then  for  the  first  time,  and  as  a  distinc- 
tive mark,  called  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and  it  included  all 
the  churches  in  the  west,  and  throughout  the  world,  in  com- 
munion wuh  the  see  of  Rome.  This  is  the  church  of  which 
St.  Augustin  says.  Contra  Evistolam  Fundamenti — 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  49 

**I  would  not  believe  the  gospel,  if  the  authority  of  the  Cath  lie  church  did 
not  move  me  thereto." 

And  in  his  book  De  Symbolo, 

"Tliis  is  the  holy  church — the  one  church — the  Catholic  church — the  true 
church,  which  contending  against  all  heresies  may  herself  be  assailed,  but 
cannot  be  overcome.  AU  heresies  have  gone  out  from  her,  like  useless 
branches  cut  off  from  the  vine — she  herself  remaining  fixed  to  the  root — fixed 
to  the  stock — fixed  in  charity,  and  against  which  the  Agates  of  hell  shall  not 
prevail.^ " 

But  as  to  the  distinction  between  the  church  of  Rome  and 
the  Catholic  church,  it  was  unknown  to  St.  Augustin,  unless 
when  he  happened  to  speak  of  the  diocess  of  Rome.  This  I 
have  shown  in  a  former  quotation,  where  he  holds  a  succession 
from  the  chair  of  Peter,  to  whom  Christ  committed  the  care  of 
the  whole  flock,  to  be  absolutely  necessary.  And  St.  Jerome, 
in  his  letter  to  Pope  Damascus,  says, — 

"  To  thee  I  know  were  given  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Who 
ftoever  ^athereth  not  with  thee  scattereth — that  is,  he  that  is  not  Christ's  is 
antichrist's." 

And  again  he  says, 

"  I  could  dry  up  all  the  streams  of  your  argument  with  one  ray  of  that  sua 
which  shines  upon  the  church." 

Irenseus  is  equally  strong  upon  the  very  same  point.  Mr. 
Pope  and  I  are  at  variance  w4th  respect  to  the  interpretation  ot 
a  particular  text.  Mr.  Pope  says  that  every  man  should  fol- 
low his  private  judgment.  I  maintain  he  should  submit  to  the 
authority  of  the  church.  Mr.  Pope  then  appeals  to  the  text. 
Let  him  make  the  Bible  speak.  (Here  Mr.  Maguire  laid  his 
finger  upon  the  Bible.)  It  is  a  poor  rule  of  faith,  truly,  if  it 
cannot  decide.  If  he  succeeds  in  making  the  Bible  speak,  1 
shall  be  converted  to  his  opinions  ;  but  if  the  Bible  remain  mute, 
he  should  not  set  up  as  a  rule  of  faith,  a  book  which  cannot 
pronounce  a  decision.  According  to  my  principles,  the  church 
.s  to  judge,  that  is  to  decide,  upon  matters  of  faith.  The  scrip- 
fares  are  the  rule  of  our  conduct — the  church  interpreting  the 
scriptures  is  the  rule  of  our  faith.  The  scriptures  we  reverence 
av  d  venerate,  just  as  we  do  the  images  of  Christ  and  his  saints. 
The  royal  prophet  laughed  at  the  gods  of  the  Gentiles,  because 
tiiey  could  not  speak ;  those  who  make  the  scriptures  the  sole 
judge  of  controversies,  expose  them  to  similar  contempt,  be- 
cause at  the  best,  they  are  but  a  dumb  judge,  and  consequently 
unable  to  pronounce. 

Mr.  Pope  says,  Catholics  believe  articles  of  faith  which  are 
not  in  the  scriptures,  Protestants  also  believe  many  articles  of 
^ith  not  to  be  found  in  the  sacred  volume.  There  are  articles 
of  faith  not  explicitly  revealed.     Our  Saviour  himself  tells  his 

5 


50  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

disciples,  that  he  has  many  more  things  to  say  to  them,  which 
they  are  not  as  yet  able  to  bear ;  but  he  promises  at  the  same 
time  to  send  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  would  instruct  them  in  all 
things.  Their  weak  minds  might  have  been  shocked  by  the 
too  sudden  revelation  of  divine  truths.  It' such  was  the  caution 
observed  by  Christ  towards  his  apostles,  how  much  more  ought 
it  to  be  observed  towards  the  pooi'  and  ignorant  of  mankind  1 
Mr.  Pope  endeavors  to  gloss  over  the  fooleries  and  fanaticisna 
generated  by  the  principles  which  he  advocates.  But  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  ignorant,  the  unlearned,  and  the  weak-minded, 
who  form  the  great  majority  of  mankind,  can  alone  proceed 
safely,  when  conducted  by  a  living  guide.  If  they  be  allowed 
to  frame  a  rule  of  faith  for  themselves,  embark  without  chart  or 
compass  upon  the  wide  ocean  of  opinion— if  they  are  allowed 
to  think  upon  matters  of  faith  as  they  please,  the  result  will  be, 
they  will  give  way  to  prejudice  and  passion,  and  substitute  their 
own  judgment  for  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ.  When  Mr. 
Pope  hands  the  Bible  to  the  poor  and  ignorant  Protestant,  how 
can  he  know  that  it  is  the  word  of  God.  When  the  Protestant 
arrives  at  the  years  of  discretion  he  must  receive  it  from  his 
parents,  from  some  clergyman,  or  from  Mr.  Pope,  and  the  only 
reason  he  can  assign  for  his  believing  it  is,  that  he  received  it 
from  them  or  from  Mr.  Pope.  Let  the  other  rule  be  examined, 
and  let  the  common  sense  of  mankind  judge  whether  it  is  not 
the  better.  The  child  receives  the  scriptures  upon  the  authority 
of  that  church  in  reference  to  which  St.  Augustin  said,  "  1 
would  not  receive  the  gospels,  unless  upon  the  authority  of  the 
Catholic  church."  I  may  here  remark,  that  there  were  at  one 
^ime  in  circulation  nine  spurious  copies  of  the  gospel  of  St. 
Matthew,  each  pretending  to  be  the  true  original.  The  apos- 
tolical churches  were  then  consulted,  and  the  genuine  copy 
ascertained.  The  church  pronounced  her  decision,  upon  which 
St.  Augustin  rested  his  faith.  If  Mr.  Pope  insists  upon  the 
scriptures  being  the  sole  rule  of  faith,  then  why  does  he  not 
^•vash  his  neighbor's  feet?  As  the  Lord  says  to  his  disciples, 
"  If  I,  being  Lord  and  Master,  have  washed  your  feet ;  you  also 
ought  to  wash  one  another's  feet."  If  he  cannot  show  me  that 
this  is  not  a  commandment,  let  him  show  me  why  he  does  not 
continue  to  obey  it.  Let  him  also  justify  from  scripture  the 
change  in  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath. 

Mr.  Pope  rose  and  said  : — Gentlemen— my  learned  friend 
lias  asked,  when  we  are  individually  all  fallible,  by  what  procesg 
can  we  arrive  at  an  infallible  decision?     I  ask  my  friend  the  . 
same  question.     He  has  told  us,  that  he  believes  the  Pope  to  be 
fallible,  and  all  the  bishops  and  priests  of  the  Romish  church  te 


THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CHURCH.  51 

be  fallible.  Now,  T  should  wish  to  know  by  what  method  they, 
who  according  to  Mr.  Maguire's  own  confession  are  all  fallible^ 
can  become  infalUble  ?  He  tells  me,  that  if  my  doctrines  be 
admitted,  a  young  child  must  remain  an  Atheist  until  he  arrives 
at  years  of  discretion.  Now,  what  do  I  find  the  scriptuies 
raying  on  this  subject?  "Train  up  a  child  in  the  way  he 
should  go,  and  when  he  is  old  he  will  not  depart  therefrom.'^ 
The  Psalmist  declares,  '*  that  out  of  the  mouths  of  babes  an<) 
sucklings  God  has  perfected  praise  :"  and  the  Saviour  remarks, 
that  "  the  things  which  are  hidden  from  the  wise  and  prudent, 
are  revealed  unto  babes."  I  readily  admit,  that,  in  the  first 
instance,  in  a  great  degree,  the  faith  of  the  Protestant  child,  as 
to  the  authenticity  and  inspiration  of  the  scriptures,  must  rest 
on  the  veracity  of  the  parent.  And  I  ask  Mr.  Maguire,  is  not 
this  the  case  with  the  children  of  Roman  Catholics  ?  How  can 
a  Roman  Catholic  child  believe  that  the  church  of  Rome  is 
infallible,  or  that  she  possesses  any  authority,  unless  the  child 
receives  these  opinions  on  the  authority  of  the  parent  1 

Do  we,  in  point  of  fact,  find  more  Atheists  among  the  children 
of  Protestants  than  among  those  of  the  Roman  Catholic  com- 
munion 1  Let  facts  decide.  But  my  friend  says,  I  argue  in  a 
vicious  circle,  because  I  prove  the  inspiration  and  authority  of 
the  sacred  scriptures  by  the  right  of  private  judgment,  and 
maintain  the  right  of  every  man  to  exercise  his  judgment  by  the 
authority  of  the  scriptures.  But  this  exercise  of  the  judgment 
is  an  inherent  right,  implanted  in  man  by  the  God  of  Heaven,  to 
whom  we  are  accountable.  There  is  no  other  way  given  of 
discovering  truth.  We  possess  a  natural  right  to  exercise  our 
judgments  on  the  contents  of  any  document  purporting  to  be  a 
revelation  from  God.  The  Apostles  themselves  appealed  to 
the  judgments  of  men.  There  is  no  other  mode  of  deciding 
upon  the  authority  of  the  scriptures,  but  by  the  exercise  of  pri- 
vate judgment.  And  a  subsequent  appeal  to  the  inspired 
oracles  in  confirmation  of  the  right  of  private  judgment,  does  not 
militate  against  the  laws  of  sound  reasoning.  1  deny,  there- 
fore, that  T  argued  in  a  vicious  circle.  But,  on  the  contrary,  I 
assert,  that  this  was  the  case  with  my  friend,  Mr.  Maguire. 
What  were  the  arguments  which  he  made  use  of  to  show  the 
authority  of  his  Church  1  When  asked  to  prove  her  authority, 
he  refers  to  the  scriptures ;  and  when  again  requested  to  prove 
the  authority  of  the  scriptures,  he  refers  to  the  church.  Just  as 
if  I  were  (to  give  you  a  famihar  illustration)  to  take  two  books, 
and  place  the  one  up'^i  the  other — thus. — (Here  Mr.  Pope 
taking  two  books  gave  a  practical  illustration  of  his  meaning.) 
The  same  part  cannot  be  at  once  the  superstructure  and  the 
foundation.     If  the  church  gives  authority  to  the  scriptures. 


b%  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

then  the  authority  of  the  church  must  be  independont  of  the 
scriptures  ;  and  we  cannot  appeal  to  the  scriptures  in  support 
of  her  authority.  If  the  scriptures  give  authority  to  the  church, 
the  authority  of  the  scriptures  must  be  independent  of  the  au- 
thority of  the  church  ;  and  we  cannot  appeal  to  the  ohurch  in 
support  of  their  authority.  My  learned  friend  has  asked  me 
for  my  creed.  I  have  given  it ;  and  now  return  the  question 
j-pon  himself.  He  would,  no  doubt,  tell  me  that  he  beheved 
whatever  the  church  has  decreed.  This  you  will  find  is  an 
exceedingly  indefinite  reply.  My  friend  agreed  with  Delahogue 
in  his  Tractatus  de  Ecclesi^,  that  there  are  eighteen  general 
councils  ;  but  he  was  not  giiite  certain  as  to  the  number,  nor 
did  he  attempt  to  specify  the  peculiar  characteristics  necessary 
to  designate  a  council  as  general.  You  perceive,  therefore, 
when  I  ask  Mr.  Maguire  for  his  confession  of  faith,  he  has  to 
refer  to  general  councils  ;  and  yet  at  the  same  time  he  cannot 
state,  by  what  mark  a  general  council  can  be  distinguishcc^ 
from  others  :  while  I  appeal  for  my  creed  to  certain  well-defined 
anicles,  and  to  the  Bible  as  the  ground-work  of  the  Christian 
faith.  Now,  I  would  ask,  whose  creeds  is  the  most  defined — 
mine,  which  is  contained  in  the  book  of  God,  the  Bible ;  or 
Mr.  Maguire's,  who  refers  you  to  general  councils,  of  the 
authority  of  some  of  which  doubts  are  entertained  ;  and  to  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers,  scattered  through  a  miulti- 
tude  of  ponderous  folios'?  I  afiirm,  that  I  do  not  difi^er  in  any 
essential  point  of  faith  from  the  church  of  England,  or  from  any 
Protestant  communion.  I  think,  however,  my  reverend  friends 
of  the  Establishment  will  doubtless  feel  much  obliged  to  Mr. 
Maguire  for  his  application  of  the  Ark  of  Noah  to  the  church  of 
England.  Mr.  Maguire  has  stated,  that  we  cannot  find  any 
authority  in  the  scriptures  for  keeping  the  first  day  of  the  w^eek 
jnstead  of  the  seventh.  I  answer,  that  we  find,  that  the  disci- 
ples assembled  together  on  two  successive  first  days,  after  the 
Saviour  rose  from  the  dead. — (John,  xx,  19,  26.)  In  Acts^ 
XX,  7,  we  are  told,  that  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  the  disciples 
met  together  to  break  bread.  And  in  1  Cor.  xvi,  2,  the  prac- 
tice appears  to  be  confirmed.  Such  then  was  the  custom  of 
the  Apostle  and  the  other  disciples,  as  recorded  in  holy  writ. 
We  now  follow  their  example.  My  learned  opponent  has 
asked,  if  the  Bible  be  the  rule  of  fliith  and  practice,  and  that  we 
are  bound  to  obey  it,  why  do  I  not  wash  my  brother's  feet,  as 
commanded  by  our  Lord  to  do  so  1  Now,  I  reply,  that  were  I 
in  an  eastern  country,  t  would  do  so  with  readiness.  We  ali 
are  aware,  that  in  eastern  countries,  on  account  of  the  great 
heaty  it  is  regarded  as  an  act  of  kindness  to  assist  a  guest  who 
may  have  travelled  from  a  distance,  in  taki  ig  off  his  sandals, 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  53 

and  in  presenting  water  for  his  feet :  but  as  this  climate  is  tem- 
perate, my  judgment  leads  me  to  suppose,  that  I  am  not  called 
upon  to  *'  wash  the  feet  of  my  neighbor."  With  respect  to  the 
passages  which  I  quoted  from  the  Apocalypse,  I  beg  to  say,  that 
I  did  not  quote  them  partially ;  the  quotations,  when  consulted, 
will  decide.  I  did  not  argue  from  a  particular  to  a  universal. 
T  merely  showed,  that  there  were  distinct  commands  given  for 
writing  at  least  portions  of  the  word  of  life ;  and  these  com- 
mands are  recorded  for  our  instruction.  With  respect  to  the 
Clementine  edition,  I  assert,  that  the  Douay  version  is  from  the 
Clementine,  and  that  consequently  the  translators  have  subjected 
themselves  to  the  penalties  imposed  by  Sistus. 

My  friend  has  said,  that  neither  he  himself^  nor  scarcely  any 
one  else  believes  in  the  infalliUliiy  of  the  Pope,  Need  I  again 
say,  that  the  Italians  believe  implicitly  in  the  infallibility  of  the 
i^ope  ?     Cardinal  Bellarmine  says, 

"  If  the  Pope  could  or  sliould  so  far  err  as  to  command  the  practice  of  vice, 
and  to  forbid  virtuous  actionsj  the  church  were  bound  to  believe  vices  to  be 
good,  and  virtues  to  be  bad  ! !" — De  Pontiff.  Rom.  lib.  iv,  cap.  5.  injin. 

Cardinal  Zabarelli  informs  us,  that 

"The  Pope  can  do  all  things,  whatsoever  he  pleases,  even  unlawful  thing"?, 
and  is  more  than  God !  /" — De  Schism.  Sul.  Serm.  Script,  p.  70. 

Masonnus  says, 

"That  the  Roman  Pontiffs  cannot  even  sin  without  praise!!" — Lib.  ii^,i 
Vit.  Johanni  IX. 

My  friend  told  me,  that  the  divines  in  the  church  of  Rome 
are  allowed  to  exercise  their  private  judgment  on  matters  of 
discipline.  I  am  glad  to  hear  it,  and  I  trust  the  same  privilege 
will  also  be  granted  to  the  people.  He  asks  me,  how  is  a  poor 
man  to  decide,  when  I  hand  him  the  Bible,  whether  it  is  really 
inspired  or  not?  I  briefly  answer,  when  I  hand  the  scripturcb' 
to  a  person  in  the  humbler  walks  of  life,  should  he  express  any 
doubt  of  their  inspiration,  I  would  say  to  him — "Read  this 
blessed  volume,  and  you  will  discover  in  it  proofs,  that  it  has 
come  from  God." 

I  now  ask  my  friend  in  reply,  how  is  the  peasant  to  examine 
the  many  ponderous  volumes  which  contain  the  councils  of  the 
church  of  Rome  ?  And  without  such  examination,  how  can  he 
truly  ascertain  the  opinions  of  his  church?  This  question 
appears  to  me  infinitely  more  perplexing  than  that  proposed  by 
Mr.  Maguire.  We  do  not  assert  that  the  authorized  Bible  is 
in^.maculate,  but  maintain,  that  it  fully  gives  *'  the  mind  of  the 
spirit,"  guoad  fidem  et  mores,  as  to  matters  of  faith  and  morals. 
We  find  the  Saviour  and  his  Apostles  quoting  from  the  Septua- 
gint,  which  was  not  immaculate,  a  circumstance  that  may  render 

5* 


54  THE   ixM\'.L:.:3i:.rrY  of 

us  satisfied  with  translations,  tliougli  not  absolutely  perfect. 
Sixtus  speaks  not  only  of  Clausua  and  Periodiis,  but  also  of  wi- 
nima particula.  Compare  the  Clementine  and  Sixtine  editions  of 
the  scriptures,  and  it  is  clear  the  Douay  doctors  considered  the 
Clementine  ths  better  of  the  two,  since  that  is  the  edition  which 
they  have  followed.  That  discrepancies  exist  between  the 
Sixtine  and  Clementine  editions,  is  a  matter  of  notoriety 
amongst  theologians.  With  respect  to  justification  by  faith 
alone,  he  refers  to  Luther  ;  but  I  would  refer  him  to  the  epistle 
written  to  the  church  which  he  claims  as  his  own,  the  church  of 
Rome.  In  the  third  chapter  of  the  Romans,  and  2Cth  verse, 
*t  is  said,  ^' We  account  a  man  to  be  justified  by  faith  without 
ti  e  works  of  the  law."  He  charges  me  with  denying  the  im- 
portance of  good  works.  I  distinctly  assert,  that  I  desire  to 
witness  the  fruits  of  righteousness  universally  exhibited  ;  but  I 
hold  that  the  only  mode  of  laying  the  foundation  of  morahty,  is 
to  proclaim  justification  by  faith  in  the  Son  of  God.  No  other 
doctrine  can  touch  the  heart,  or  withdraw  it  from  the  love  of  the 
world.  A  Christian  lives  not  to  himself,  but  to  him  Vvho  died 
and  rose  again,  that  he  might  be  Lord  both  of  the  dead  and 
living.  Fixing  his  eye  on  Calvary,  he  sees  the  evidence  of  his 
own  sin,  and  the  redeeming  m.ercy  of  his  Saviour.  Though 
deeply  feeling  his  own  unworthiness,  through  the  blood  of  Jesus 
he  is  freed  from  embarrassing  anxiety — and  as  an  adopted  son 
— can  pour  out  his  soul  before  him  ;  for  "  God  so  loved  the 
world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 
believeth  in  him  should  not  perish  but  have  everlasting  life." 
He  desires  to  count  all  things  but  loss  for  the  excellency  of  the 
knowledge  of  Christ  Jesus,  and  grounds  his  hopes  of  accep- 
tance exclusively  on  his  merits.  He  is  enabled,  in  some  humble 
measure,  to  run  in  the  way  of  his  commandments,  because  he 
feels  himself  not  to  be  his  own,  but  Christ's — by  erection  and 
redemption,  purchased  by  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  and  therefore 
bound,  by  interest  as  well  as  gratitude,  to  dedicate  himself, 
body,  soul,  and  spirit,  to  the  glory  of  God,  which  is  his  reasona- 
ble service. 

My  friend  has  desired  me  to  point  out  a  passage  in  the  Yul- 
gate,  in  which  there  is  a  single  error,  or  which  differs  in  the 
slightest  particular  from  the  originals.  I  shall  refer  him  to 
the  passage  in  the  11th  of  Hebrews,  where  the  Apostle  says, 
*hat  "  Jacob  worshipped,  leaning  on  the  top  of  his  staff," 
ngogexvprjaev  ettl  to  oacgov  Ti]g  kuviov  qa^dov  or,  as  the  words  are 
in  the  Vulgate,  "  adoravit  cacumen  virgce  ejus,^^  or,  in  the  Douay 
Bible,  "  adored  the  top  of  his  rod."  St.  Jerome  does  not 
agree  with  the  interpretation  received  by  the  church  of  Rome. 
— (Quajs.  Hebr.  in  Genes.  Erasm.  Edit.  vol.  vi,  p.  228.)     In 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  55 

proof  that  the  church  of  Rome  has  not  furnished  an  authorized 
and  immaculate  commentary,  hear  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Doyle,  in 
answer  to  a  question,  before  the  Lord's  committee. 

"  You  consider  yourselves  pledged  to  all  matters  contained  in  these  notes  ? 
— No,  not  by  any  means ;  on  the  contrary,  there  were  notes  affixed,  I  beheve, 
to  the  Rhemish  Testament,  which  were  most  objectionable  ;  and,  on  being 
presented  to  us,  we  caused  them  to  be  expunged.  The  notes  carry,  ii^ 
orR  editions  of  the  bible,  no  weight  ;  for  we  do  not  know  the  writers 
of  many  of  them.  If  we  find  them  clear  enough  in  explanation  of  doctrine, 
we  leave  them  there ;  but  whenever  we  find  any  thing  exceptionable,  we  put 
them  out,  as  we  have  done  in  the  cases  I  have  referred  to." — Dr.  DoyWi 
Evidence  before  the  House  of  Lords ^  p.  222. 

I  assert  then,  that  we  have  strong  proofs  against  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  church  of  Rome ;  inasmuch  as  she  has  not  been 
able  to  furnish  a  perfect  edition  of  the  scriptures — nor  a  standard 
commentary — except  we  choose  to  take  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  Fathers,  as  contamed  in  the  numberless  and  massy 
volumes  that  have  emanated  from  their  pens  !  My  friend  has 
talked  of  a  ray  of  light  which  would  dry  up  all  the  streams  oi 
Protestant  opinion — I  wish  he  would  now  suffer  that  ray  to 
beam  upon  us.  If  he  be  able  to  produce  such  a  light,  is  it  not 
uncharitable  in  my  reverend  friend  to  allov/  us  any  longer  to 
remain  in  the  state  of  darkness  of  which  he  speaks  ?  But  my 
friend  has  also  brought  forward  the  numbers  attached  to  his 
church  as  a  proof  of  her  universality.  Numbers,  permit  me  to 
say,  are  no  proof  of  truth.  If  such,  however,  be  regarded  as  a 
proof  of  universality  and  infallibility,  the  church  of  Rome  cannot 
be  the  universal  or  infallible  church.  It  has  been  ascertained, 
that  there  are  at  present  seventy-five  millions  of  Protestants, 
and,  in  addition,  fifty  millions  belonging  to  the  Greek  church, 
vv^ho  also  protest  against  the  church  of  Rome.  Now  the  aggre- 
gate of  these  is  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  millions  ;  while 
the  number  belonging  to  the  Roman  Catholic  church  amounts 
to  but  ninety  millions.  So  that  we  perceive,  even  in  point  of 
numbers,  this  wonderfully  infallible  and  universal  church,  when 
weighed  in  the  balance,  is  found  wanting. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  asserted,  that  the  Bible  is  a  dumb  judge, 
and  unable  to  pronounce — yet  we  find  that  the  Saviour  consid- 
ered it  competent  to  decide  ;  for  he  again  and  again  appealed 
to  the  Old  Testament  scriptures — "  Had  ye  believed  Moses,  ye 
would  have  believed  me,  for  he  wrote  of  me." 

It  is  worthy  of  observation,  that  Bellarmine  (de  Conciliis,  1, 
i,  ch.  6,)  gives  us  a  list  of  general  councils /(ar//^  confirmed  and 
partly  rejected;  and  (in  c.  v,  and  Rom.  Pont.  1,  iv,  c.  11,)  he 
says,  that  several  things  in  those  councils  allowed  to  be  general, 
were  foisted  in  by  heretics — he  knows  not  how.  My  learned 
OQDonent  in  correct,  according  to  Delahogue,  as  to  the  numbers 


66  THE    INFALLIBILITY    OF 

of  general  councils — but  strange  to  say,  Delaliogue  himsell 
admits,  that  there  is  a  division  respecting  the  council  of  Con- 
stance— all  Catholics,  he  observes,  confess  that  as  to  some  of  ita 
sessions  it  was  ecumenical ;  the  Italians  deny  that  it  was 
ecumenical  as  to  all  its  sessions,  while  the  French  church 
vigorously  maintain  the  directly  opposite  opinion. — Tract  de 
Eccles.  p.  451.) 

Again,  Delahogue  (p.  452,)  acknowledges  the  uncertaint)' 
existing  respecting  the  5th  Lateran  council,  and  quotes  the  fol- 
lowing passage  from  Bellarmine: 

"It  remains  a  question  among  Catholics  to  the  present  day,  whether  the 
5th  Lateran  be  truly  a  general  Council." — (L.  ii,  de  Cone.  c.  13.) 

I  beg  to  remark,  that  Delahogue  must  include  the  .council  of 
Constance,  or  the  5th  Lateran,  in  order  to  complete  the  number 
of  eighteen  general  councils.  And  yet  with  all  the  assistance 
of  an  infallible  church,  he  has  not  told  us  which  of  the  two  he 
has  adopted,  not  having  prefixed  any  number  to  either.  There- 
fore, another  infallible  tribunal  is  called  for,  to  determine  which 
councils  are  general,  and  which  are  not ;  and  an  infallible 
depository  is  required  to  preserve  the  councils,  according  to 
Bellarmine,  from  the  interpolations  of  heretics  !  I  would  ask, 
is  it  the  character  of  the  council  which  is  to  decide  the  ortho- 
doxy of  the  doctrine,  or  the  orthodoxy  of  the  doctrine  the  char- 
acter of  the  councin  If  the  former,  who  is  to  decide  upon  the 
characteristics  of  a  general  council  1  If  the  latter,  why  is  not 
the  council  of  Tyra,  held  in  the  Cth  century,  received  as 
general,  as  well  as  the  first  council  of  Nice — both  having  been 
summoned  by  imperial  authority?  Was  not  the  5th  council 
assembled  at  Constantinople  in  despite  of  the  opposition  of  Pope 
Yigilius  ?  Did  not  that  council  condemn  as  heretical,  three 
books,  against  the  express  prohibition  of  Vigilius — the  one  by 
Ibas,  Bishop  of  Edessa,  the  other  of  Theodorus  of  Mopsuestia, 
and  the  other  of  Theodoret,  Bishop  of  Cyrus  1  And  yet  was 
not  that  very  council  in  the  end  approved  of  by  the  successors 
of  Yigilius,  and,  in  fine,  received  throughout  all  the  church  as  a 
true  and  ecumenical  council  1  (Yide  Baronium  in  Justiniano 
et  Yigilo,  tom.  vii,  et  Sirmundum  Preefat,  in  secund.)  All  this 
doubt  and  confusion  carry  upon  them  prima  facie  evidence,  that 
the  church  of  Rome  is  destitute  of  infallibility. 

I  now  solemnly  put  it  to  Mr.  Maguire's  conscience,  will  he 
stand  to  every  thing  which  is  decreed  in  general  councils  1  I 
am  satisfied  that  he  will  not.  In  the  27th  canon  of  the  3rd 
Lateran  council,  the  persecution  of  heretics  is  recommended. 
It  is  decreed  (3  Lat.  council,  can.  16,)  that  "oaths  are  to  be 
regarded  as  perjuries  which  militate  against  ecclesiastical  utility 
and  the  institutes  of  the  holy  Fathers."  Will  Mr.  Maguire,  I  say, 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  57 

fitand  to  such  decrees  1  He  cannot ;  he  will  not.  What  then 
becomes  of  the  infallibility  of  general  councils  in  his  estimation? 
Again — we  have  had  contradictions  the  most  opposite.  The 
council  of  Constance  deposed  three  Popes  and  declared  the 
papal  authority  was  subject  to  a  council.  We  n)ay  differ  about 
the  signification  of  passages  in  the  scripture,  but  we  can  appeal 
to  common  sense — to  the  context — or  to  the  analogy  of  faith — 
but  we  cannot  appeal  to  an  infallible  tribunal  to  decide — for  the 
existence  of  such  a  tribunal  is  the  matter  in  debate.  But  facts 
can  speak — council  is  against  council — Pope  against  Pope. 
The  church  of  Rome  has  not  yet  been  able  to  decide  as  to  the 
seat  of  her  supposed  infallibility ;  and,  by  referring  me  to  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers  to  discover  the  doctrines  of 
scripture,  bids  me  to  waste  my  life  in  wandering  through  their 
ponderous  folios.  Facts,  such  as  these,  lead  me  at  once  to 
conclude,  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  not  infallible. 

Mr.  Maguire — I  have  first  a  few  words  to  say  in  reply  to 
Mr.  Pope.  He  has  endeavored,  but  in  vain,  to  get  over  the 
difficulty  which  I  called  upon  him  to  solve,  namely,  how  a  Pro- 
testant child  could  receive  the  Bible  as  the  inspired  word  of 
God.  The  child  could  only  receive  the  scriptures  upon  the 
private  judgment,  or  the  authority  of  the  minister.  If  he  receive 
the  scriptures  upon  that  authority,  and  that  such  authority  be 
recognised  by  Mr.  Pope,  then  the  question  is  settled.  Mr. 
Pope  endeavored  to  illustrate  his  argument  by  placing  one  book 
on  the  top  of  another,  and  he  gets  out  of  the  circle  in  which  he 
is  involved  by  upsetting  both  books.  I  defied  Mr.  Pope  to 
point  out  an  error  regarding  matters  of  faith  in  the  Latin  Vul- 
gate. He  appealed  to  a  passage  in  Hebrews  where  he  asserts 
it  is  said  of  Jacob,  "adoravit  cacumen  virgae  ejus."  Now  in 
the  first  place,  the  quotafion  is  false  and  the  Latin  is  bad — the 
words  are,  "  fastigium  virgae  ejus." — The  controversy  here  is 
about  the  Greek  word  ^Ttt,  It  signifies  towards  the  top  of  the 
staff*,  as  well  as  the  top  of  the  staff*.  The  latter  is  the  better 
translation — every  man  who  knows  Greek,  knows  the  Greek 
word  will  bear  both  meanings.  This  passage  has  been  very 
ably  discussed  by  Dr.  Lingard,  who  is  fully  qualified  to  sustain 
it.  I  can  assure  the  learned  gentlemen,  that  he  is  very  far,  in 
this  instance,  from  proving  the  existence  of  an  error  in  the  Latin 
Vulgate.  I  said  that  no  Catholic  is  bound  to  believe  in  the 
infallibility  of  the  pope  ;  and  I  re-assert,  that  it  does  not  from 
an  article  of  Catholic  faith.  Divines  have  had,  and  may  still 
have  their  private  quarrels  about  it.  But  such  differences  from 
no  breach  of  communion,  as  the  subject  matter  in  dispute,  forms 
no   artie'e  of  Catholic   faith.       "'Upon   this   roc k'V  says   our 


68  THE    INB^ALLIBILITY  OF 

Saviour,  "I  will  build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  no 
prevail  against  her."  Here  is  the  infalhbility  promised  by  oui 
Lord,  and  claimed  by  the  Catholic  church,  and  not  the  infalli- 
biliy  ot^  the  pope,  which  my  learned  adversary  would  cram 
down  the  throats  of  Catholics,  "  velint  nolint" — as  an  article  of 
Catholic  faith. 

I  called  upon  Mr.  Pope  to  produce  any  ecumenical  council 
which  contradicted  another  in  matters  of  faith.  It  is  strange 
that  he  should  quote  what  he  has  quoted  regarding  the  taking  of 
an  oath.  I  affirm  that  every  oath  should  be  taken  in  truth  and 
justice,  and  in  judgment.  No  man  should  swear  to  any  thing 
for  which  he  has  not  the  evidence  of  his  senses,  or  a  certainty 
approaching  to  mathematical  precision.  A  pe^-son  who  would 
swear  contra  statuta  patrum,  would  not,  undoubtedly,  have  such' 
evidence  to  sustain  his  oath.  I  repeat  in  the  face  of  the  learned 
world,  that  what  Mr.  Pope  has  quoted  from  the  councils,  forms 
no  part  of  their  decision  upon  matters  of  faith.  When  a  council 
decides  upon  matters  of  faith,  it  employs  a  certain  invariable 
form — "  Si  quis  dixerit,^^  "  If  any  person  shall  say,"  &c, — 
'•  anathema  sit,^^  "  let  him  be  anathema."  When  this  form  is 
employed,  the  decision  is  upon  an  article  of  faith — I  told  you 
already  there  were  eighteen  ecumenical  councils. — They  never 
issued  an  anathema  in  the  above  form,  where  an  article  of  faith 
was  not  concerned.  But,  in  matters  not  connected  with  faith 
or  essential  morality,  a  council  may  err.  The  infallibility  of 
general  councils  extends  only  to  matters  of  faith  and  essential 
discipline.  The  promise  which  Christ  made  to  his  church  was, 
that  she  should  never  teach  error.  Our  articles  of  faith  are  well 
known.  I  defy  any  one  to  produce  me  a  general  council  which 
has  contradicted  another  general  council  in  matters  of  faith. 

Mr.  Pope  speaks  vauntingly  of  seventy-five  millions  of  Pro- 
testants. Where  are  they  ?  They  do  not  exist — unless,  indeed, 
you  collect  under  the  broad  standard  of  Protestantism  many 
sects,  who  differ  more  from  each  other  than  I  do  from  my  friend, 
Mr.  Pope.  I  ask,  when  you  separate  all  those  jarring  sects, 
where  are  the  millions  of  whom  Mr.  Pope  speaks,  with  all  the 
artifice  of  a  practised  rhetorician?  But  Mr.  Pope  would  rather 
amuse  us  with  powerful  declamation,  than  descend  to  the  vulgar 
level  of  argument.  Is  it  honourable  to  adduce  against  me  the 
Arian  council  of  Basil  ?  Is  the  Catholic  church  to  be  account- 
able for  the  conduct  of  those  whom  she  had  formally  excommu- 
nicated ?  I  have  proved,  that  in  the  Catholic  church  exists  the 
authority  to  put  down  error.  Other  churches  tolerate  a  super- 
ficial conformity,  and  introduce  into  their  bosoms  vipers  that  will 
gnaw  their  very  vitals.  See  how  the  Puritans  overturned  the 
established  church,  and  kicked  out  the  bishops  of  Scotland.     It 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.  59 

is  contiary  (o  the  spirit  of  the  Ptotestant  church  to  condemn 
error,  and  yet  she  retains  the  iVthanasian  creed,  which  proves 
that  ill  her  nature  she  is  not  tolerant.  But  she  prudently 
ejihibits  this  species  of  toleration,  for  otherwise  her  churches 
would  be  deserted,  and  the  conventicles  crowded  to  excess.  If 
the  king  of  England  has  no  choice,  but  must  remain  a  Protes- 
tant of  the  church  of  England,  is  not  that  a  betrayal  of  con- 
science, and  an  inroad  upon  the  exercise  of  private  judgment? 
Is  the  Athanasian  creed  characteristic  of  that  toleration  of  which 
the  church  of  England  boasts  ?  The  man  who  swears  against 
the  doctrines  of  the  Catholic  church  perjures  himself,  as  the 
council  of  Lateran  declares.  For  it  is  not  possible  he  can  be 
certain  that  the  oath  he  takes  is  true.  How  can  any  man 
swear,  that  the  doctrines  of  the  Catholic  church  are  damnable 
and  idolatrous  1  The  oath  is  not  that  he  believes  them  so,  but 
that  they  are  so  for  fact. 

The  declaration  of  his  majesty,  prefixed  to  the  homihes, 
declares,  that  the  thirty-nine  articles  of  the  church  of  England 
contain  all  things  necessary ;  and  it  strictly  prohibits  all  differ- 
ences from  them  :  "  we  will  not  allow  (it  says)  the  least  devia- 
tion." The  church  of  England,  then,  is  not  a  particle  more 
tolerant  than  the  church  of  Rome,  though  it  evinces  a  great 
variance  in  its  practice.  If  the  Protestant  clergyman  believes 
that  a  church  has  been  established  by  Christ,  he  should  uphold 
it — if  he  does  not  believe  so,  why  should  punishment  be  inflicted 
on  those  who  separate  from  the  communion  of  the  church  of 
England  1  Ought  not  the  Protestant  clergyman  contend  against 
'those  who  rise  in  opposition  to  that  church  ?  If  they  be  the 
successors  of  St.  Peter,  and  if  the  Holy  Ghost  has  endowed 
their  church  with  the  spirit  of  grace,  as  they  would  make  us 
believe,  she  should  exercise  her  authority,  and  not  give  the 
sanction  of  her  name  to  every  spawn  of  the  innumerable  sects 
that  range  themselves  under  the  banner  of  Protestantism. 
Johanna  Southcote  exercised  the  right  of  private  judgment 
when  she  announced  herself  as  pregnant  with  the  Messiah. 
Every  man  of  sense  must  allow,  that  by  private  judgment  we 
never  can  prove  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures.  Why  then 
v*'ill  Mr.  Pope  not  receive  them  upon  the  authority  of  the  Catho* 
lie  church,  instead  of  resorting  to  the  authority  of  frail  and  falli- 
ble man? 

I  asserted  that  Christ  never  gave  a  positive  command  to  write 
the  Nev/  Testament.  If  St.  John,  at  Patmos,  was  ordered  to 
write  to  particular  churches,  that  does  not  by  any  means  prove 
that  a  special  command  was  given  by  our  Saviour  that  the  New 
Testament  should  be  written,  particularly  as  St.  John  wrote 
about  facts,  and  not  about  doctrines  to  those  particular  churches. 


60  THE  INFALLIBILITY    OF 

The  truth  is,  nearly  sixty  years  had  elapsed  from  the  death  o' 
Christ  till  the  last  of  the  New  Testament  was  written.  Wen 
the  people  of  God  left  in  the  meantime  without  a  rule  of  faith 
to  guide  and  to  direct  them?  Was  it  not  the  Roman  Catholic 
church  that  converted  these  islands  from  paganism — missiona- 
ries sent  from  Rome  to  England  rescued  that  land  from  idolatry 
cind  paganism.  The  Christian  church  was  cemented  in  the  first 
ages  with  the  blood  of  martyrs — thirty-four  Popes  in  succession 
after  St.  Peter  became  martyrs  for  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Forty-five  others  are  canonized  saints — Protestants  also  have 
their  saints  ;  and  churches  are  dedicated  to  saints..  I  may  h^re 
in  passing,  remark,  that  Catholics  do  not  worship  the  saints — it 
is  a  rank  calumny,  invented  in  order  to  fling  dust  into  the  eyes 
of  the  multitude. 

Mr.  Pope  has  not  yet  attempted  to  answer  my  direct  argu- 
ment, both  from  scripture  and  the  holy  Fathers — he  has  indeed 
advanced,  and  the  task  was  an  easy  one,  several  captious  objec- 
tions. If  a  Catholic  happens  not  to  know  the  history  of  every 
general  council  which  has  been  held,  the  conclusion  drawn  from 
such  premises  by  Mr.  Pope  is,  that  the  church  of  Christ  is 
proved  not  to  be  infallible.  Has  Mr.  Pope  quoted  any  texts  of 
scripture,  direct,  plain,  and  obvious,  like  those  I  adduced  ?  I 
have  here  more  than  seventy  passages  from  the  Fathers  upon 
the  subject,  and  I  would  read  them  to  you  if  the  time  permitted. 
In  one  of  them  the  church  is  compared  to  the  ark  of  Noah,  out 
of  which  no  one  shall  be  saved.  I  deny  that  we  look  upon  all 
Protestants  as  heretics — we  consider  Arius,  Luther,  Calvin,  &c. 
who  have  separated  directly  from  the  church,  as  heretics.  But; 
as  St.  Augustin  says,  we  do  not  consider  the  children  or  de- 
scendants of  heretics,  as  formal  heretics,  unless  they  remain 
obstinate  and  contumacious  in  their  errors.  I  am  opposed  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  Pope's  infallibility.  It  is  imposed  upon  me 
by  Mr.  Pope — but  I  have  already  stated  that  it  forms  no  part  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church,  and  is  not  received  by  the 
Catholics  throughout  the  world.  I  may  conclude  this  day'« 
discussion  by  again  asserting  that  Christ  promised  he  would  bf 
^vith  his  church  teiching,  preaching  and  baptizing  until  1'  c  con- 
summation of  the  world — my  scripture  proofs  therefore  'V^*^ 
untouched. 


THE    DIVINE    RIGHT    or*    i-Ri..  TE    JUDGMENT.  0*1 

Second  Day. — Friday,  April  20. 


SUBJECT. —  The  Divine  Right  of  Private  Judgment  to  pt\»^ 
nounce  upon  the  Authenticity,  Integrity,  and  Canonicity  of 
Scripture,  and  to  determine  its  meaning  in  Articles  of  Faith, 

At  eleven  o'clock  the  Chair  was  taken  by  Daniel  U'Con- 
NELL,  Esq.  and  Admiral  Oliver. 

Mr.  Maguire  rose,  and  called  on  Mr.  Pope  for  proofs  to 
sustain  his  rule  of  faith,  which  he  (Mr.  Maguirp)  undcrsiood  to 
mean  private  judgment. 

Mr.  Pope — I  shall  preface  my  observations  this  day,  by 
assuring  the  present  meeting,  that  I  was  under  the  fu"  Cuiivic- 
tion,  that  I  should  yesterday  have  had  an  opportunity  of  replying 
to  Mr.  Maguire's  last  speech.  Mr.  Maguire  spoke  six  times, 
while  my  addresses  were  but  five  in  number.  In  justice, 
therefore,  the  right  of  reply  was  vested  in  me  :  but  as  the  chair- 
men were  divided  on  the  point,  and  as  I  felt  that  my  arguments 
against  the  infallibility  of  the  church  of  Rome  had  been  cogent 
and  satisfactory,  I  waved  my  privilege.  I  cannot  avoid  noticing 
the  bold,  and,  I  must  say,  unfounded  assertion  of  my  opponents 
that  T  did  not  touch  one  of  his  arguments.  Gentlemen,  you  will 
decide  on  that  question.  I  regret  that  it  is  the  fashion  of  many 
advocates  of  the  church  of  Rome,  to  substitute  barefaced  asser- 
tion and  high-sounding  language  for  solid  argument. 

With  respect  to  the  proofs  of  the  right  of  private  judgment,  I 
shall  first  adduce  negative  evidence.  If  there  be  no  infallible 
tribunal,  man  is  under  the  necessity  of  exercising  his  judgment. 
I  shall  therefore  make  (partly  in  reply  to  Mr.  Maguire)  some 
remarks  on  the  infallibility  of  the  church  of  Rome.  And  first, 
I  beg  to  say,  that  Mr.  Maguire  has  not  proved  that  the  church  of 
Rome  is  the  church  of  Christ.  The  passages,  I  maintain,  which 
he  adduces  from  scripture,  do  not  demonstrate  the  infallibility  of 
Oiny  church — much  less  the  infallibity  of  the  church  of  Rome, 

It  is  remarkable,  that  the  church  of  Rome,  which  has  defined 
every  thing,  has  never  given  a  definition  of  herself!  In  the 
conferences  previous  to  the  decrees  of  the  eleventh  session  of 
the  council  of  Trent,  Vincent  Lunello,  a  Franciscan  friar,  pro- 
posed that  a  d(!finition  of  the  church  and  her  authority  should 
precede  the  declarations  of  the  disputed  pomts  of  doctrine. 
The  motion  was  rejected. — (Sarpi^s  History  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  1.  ii,  p.   155,  Geneva,  1625.)     If  the  church  has  not 


6S  THE    DIVINE    RIGHi 

defined  herself,  how  are  her  votaries  to  discover  the  source  from 
which  they  are  to  derive  their  opinions.  Mr.  Maguire  also 
admitted,  if  I  nnistake  not,  that  in  the  priniitive  ages  tlie  church 
of  Rome  was  nut  looked  upon  as  the  Catholic  church. 

In  reference  to  Matt,  v,  13. — "But  if  the  salt  has  lost  its 
SBvor,"  &c.  I  beg  to  observe,  that  Maundrell  in  his  travels, 
expressly  mentions,  that 

"In  the  Valley  of  Salt,  near  Gebul,  and  about  four  hours'  journey  from 
Aleppo,  there  is  a  small  precipice,  occasioned  by  the  continual  taking  away 
of  the  salt.  In  this,  says  he,  you  may  see  how  the  veins  of  it  lie  :  I  broke  a 
piece  of  it,  of  which  the  part  exposed  to  the  rain,  sun,  and  air,  though  it  had 
he  sparks  and  particles  of  salt,  yet  had  perfectly  lost  Us  savor,  as  in  Matt,  v." 

Again — there  was  an  asphaltic  substance,  which  was  used  by 
the  Jews  to  salt  their  sacrifices,  and  which,  if  kept  too  long,  lost 
its  flavour,  and  was  thrown  upon  the  floor  of  the  Temple  to 
prevent  the  Priests'  slipping.  Hence  the  allusion — "  Trodden 
under  foot  of  men,''^  These  observations  will,  I  trust,  serve  to 
^hovv  that  the  Saviour  in  the  passage  which  we  are  considering^ 
could  not  have  alluded  to  the  infallibility  of  the  Apostles. 

Does  my  friend  mean  to  say,  that  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine 
editions  do  not  vary  in  minima  particula  ?  I  have  a  work  now 
oefore  mc,  "  Home's  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures," in  which  he  gives  us  a  specimen  of  the  discrepancies 
existing  between  the  Clementine  and  Sixtine  editions.  As  to 
Jacob  worshipping  the  top  of  his  rod,  as  the  Douay  Testament 
has  it,  I  beg  to  observe,  that  the  Apostle  Paul  quoted  from  the 
Septuagint.  The  original  Hebrew  word  in  the  47th  of  Genesis 
and  31st  verse,  to  which  St.  Paul  refers,  according  to  the  dif- 
ferent pointing,  signifies  both  "  a  rod  and  a  bed."  The  Douay 
Bible  translates  the  passage  (Gen.  xlvii,  31,)  thus  :  "  And  he 
said,  swear  thou  to  me.  And  as  he  was  swearing,  Israel  adored 
God,  TURNING  TO  the  bed's  head."  The  scholars,  however, 
can  at  once  decide,  whether  "  Jacob  adored  the  top  of  his  rod" 
is  not  a  gross  mistranslation  of  the  original  text. 

Mr.  Maguire  insinuated  that  the  canons  of  the  third  council 
of  Lateran,  (27  and  16,)  relative  to  the  persecution  of  heretics, 
and  to  oaths  which  militate  against  ecclesiastical  utility,  are 
matters  of  discipline  ;  but  I  insist  that  they  relate  to  morals — 
^^ pertinent  ad  mores.^^  We  all  know,  how  Jesuits  and  others 
interpret  "  Ecclesiastical  utility." 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  the  pope  may  be  the  sole  author 
of  the  canons  of  a  council,  Dupin,  in  reference  to  the  70 
canons  passed  in  the  fourth  or  great  Lateran  council,  (vol.  ii 
p.  449,)  writes, 

"Matthew  Paris  says,  that  these  canons  seemed  tolerable  to  some  of  the 
pielates,  biit  grievous  to  others.     Bis  words  are  these,  '  Facto  prius  ah  ipse 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  63 

ptpa  exhortalioiiis  sermone,  recitata  sunt  in  pleno  concilio  capihda  septuaginia, 
qwz  aliis  placabilia,  aliis  videbantur  07icrosay  Let  the  case  be  how  it  will,  it 
is  certain,  that  these  canons  were  not  made  by  the  council  but  by  Innocent 
III,  who  presented  them  to  the  council  ready  drawn  up,  and  ordered  tlem  .0 
6e  read  ;  and  that  the  prelates  did  not  enter  into  any  debate  upon  theia  but 
;hat  their  silence  was  taken  for  an  approbation." 

Is  it  not  evident,  therefore,  that  the  canons  were  forced  upon 
^he  council  by  Pope  Innocent  IIH 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Murray,  in  his  examination  before  the  Com- 
mon's committee,  p.  223,  when  asked, 

"  Will  you  be  so  good  as  to  explain  the  nature  of  the  authority  of  the  Pope?" 
replied,  "  he  is  the  executive  power  of  the  church  ;  his  office  is  to  enforce  the 
observance  of  the  canons." 

I  would  remark,  that  the  Pope  possesses  also  a  dispensing 
power. — The  Maynooth  class-book  informs  us, 

"  That  the  Pope  may,  according  to  circumstances,  dispense  even  with  the 
laws  of  a  general  council,  whenever  a  legitimate  cause  shall  arise." — ^P.  360. 

Mr.  Butler  states, 

*'That,  in  the  opinion  of  all  Roman  Catholics,  it  belongs  to  the  Pope  in 
extraordinary  cases  to  act  in  opposition  to  the  canons." 

Do  not  these  statements  sufficiently  demonstrate  the  supreme 
power  exercised  by  the  Pope,  both  in  council  and  out  of  council  ? 

Mr.  Maguire  was  offended  by  my  reference  to  the  council  of 
Basil.  I  ask,  was  the  council  of  Basil  ever  regarded  as  a 
general  council?  Bellarmine  (de  Eccles.  Milit.  c.  16.)  remarks, 

"  That  the  council  of  Basil  was  at  first  a  true  ecumenical  council  and 
infallible,  but  afterwards  became  a  schismatical  conventicle,  and  of  no  au- 
thority at  all !" 

Again,  Bellarmine  says,  (De  "Roman.  Pont.  L  ii,  c.  11.) 

"The  council  of  Basil,  by  common  consent,  and  with  the  legate's  concur- 
rence, concluded  that  a  council  is  above  the  Pope,  which  is  now  rightly 
judged  erroneous." 

It  is  a  fact,  that  there  is  no  standard  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
faith  in  general  use  in  this  country.  Dr.  Doyle,  speaking  on 
this  subject,  says, 

"Besides  the  articles  enumerated  in  the  creed  of  Pius  the  fourth,  there  are 
others  to  be  received  as  of  faith.  These  are  defined  in  the  sacred  canons,  of 
which  some  are  received  entire,  some  in  part,  and  of  which  no  account  can 
be  obtained  from  the  formularies  to  which  the  Roman  Catholic  bishops  have 
referred  to  as  authentic."- Dr.  Doyle's  Evidence  before  the  House  ofLordSj  p.  1 80. 

So  much  for  Dr.  Doyle's  opinion  upon  the  subject. 

As  we  have  seen  that  great  uncertainty  exists  with  respect  to 
general  councils,  I  ask  again,  (as  Mr.  Maguire  has  not  solved 
the  question)  whether  the  character  of  the  council  is  to  decide 
the  orthodoxy  of  the  doctrine,  or  the  orthodoxy  of  the  doctrmfe 
to  decide  the  character  of  the  council  ?     If  the  former,  who  is  to 


64  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

decide  upon  the  characteristics  of  a  general  councin  If  the 
orthodoxy  of  the  doctrine  is  to  decide  the  character  of  the 
council,  why  is  not  the  council  of  Tyre,  held  A.  I).  535, 
received  as  general,  as  well  as  the  first  of  Nice,  both  having 
been  alike  called  by  imperial  authority?  Mr.  Maguire  has  told 
us,  that  a  council  approved  by  the  Pope  is  infallible.  Then  the 
decrees  were  fallible  before  the  Pope  confirmed  them.  For 
instance,  the  decrees  of  the  council  of  Trent  were  fallible,  until 
they  received  the  sanction  of  the  representatives  of  the  Pope  at 
*he  council?  It  is  admitted,  that  a  council  without  the  Pope  is 
fallible,  and  that  the  Pope  per  se  is  also  fallible.  Again  Mr. 
Maguire  remarks,  that  the  decrees  of  the  Pope,  assisted  by  a 
>w  bishops  are  infallible,  when  "received  by  the  universal 
church."  I  am  desirous  of  knowing  what  is  the  meaning  of 
"  the  universal  church."  I  presume  that  it  signifies  the  Roman 
Catholic  hierarchies  in  Ireland,  in  Spain,  and  elsewhere.  These 
bodies  are  confessedly  fallible.  I  wish  then  to  know  by  wha 
process  decrees  set  forth  hy  fallible  authority  become  infallible 
when  received  by  fallible  bodies  of  men.  Again,  Bellarmine 
speaks  of  general  councils,  which  are  to  be  altogether  rejected 
and  of  general  councils  partly  to  be  received  and  partly  to  be 
rejected ;  and  also  remarks  that  several  things  in  councils 
allowed  to  be  general,  were  foisted  in  by  heretics.  We  must 
therefore  have  another  infallible  tribunal  to  decide,  what  coun- 
cils are  really  general,  and  what  passages  in  them  are  the  inter- 
polations of  heretics  !  Some  councils,  according  to  Delahogue, 
are  but  partially  received  in  some  countries,  and  wholly  admitted 
in  others.  For  instance,  that  of  Constance.  Some  doubt  of 
the  ecumenicity  of  the  first  comicil  of  Lyons.  (Delahogue,  p. 
448.)  The  fifth  Lateran  council  has  been  doubted  of,  accord- 
ing to  Bellarmine,  non  quasdam  sessiones,  not  as  to  some  ses- 
sions, but  in  toto,  altogether. 

Further — If  I  admit  the  church  of  Rome  to  be  infallible,  then 
I  must  acknowledge  its  decisions  as  divine.  But  two  divine 
traditions,  which  must  necessarily  come  from  the  same  source, 
cannot  possibly  contradict  each  other :  yet  the  second  council 
of  Lateran  (Can.  6.)  prohibits  the  marriage  of  ecclesiastics,  on 
the  ground  of  immutable  and  inherent  hohness.  The  canon 
remarks — 

"  When  they  ought  both  to  be,  and  to  be  called  the  temple  of  God,  the 
vessels  of  the  Lord,  the  shrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  is  unworthy  that  the} 
should  become  the  slaves  of  chambering  and  uncleanness." 

Such  is  the  language  in  which  the  council  speaks  of  marriage. 
But  what  says  the  scriptures  ? 

"  Marriage  is  honourahle  in  all,  and  the  bed  undefiled,  but  whoremoncfera 
and  adulterers  God  will  judge."     Heb.  xiii,  4. 


OF    PRITATE    JUDGMENT.  66 

On  this  subject  the  Bible  is  directly  at  issue  with  the  church 
of  Rome,  therefore  she  cannot  be  infallible. — Again,  permit  me 
to  ask,  were  I  to  grant  for  the  moment,  that  the  church  of  Rome 
is  infallible — is  there  not  much  danger,  lest  mistakes  should 
occur  in  the  interpretation  of  the  meaning  of  her  councils  ] 

We  have  argued  on  the  claims  of  the  church  of  Rome  to 
infallibility.  I  have  appealed  to  scripture,  reason,  common  sense, 
and  facts.  How  shall  we  decide,  whether  Mr.  Maguire's  opinion 
on  the  subject,  or  mine,  be  correct  ?  If  I  find  a  church  contra- 
dicting itself,  I  have  prima-facie  evidence  that  she  is  fallible. — 
The  council  of  Constance  deposed  three  Popes,  who  attempted 
to  sit  together  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter  (which  was  well  nigh 
broken,  as  Fuller  says,)  and  appointed  another  Pope.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  council  of  Florence  and  Trent  have  raised  the 
authority  of  the  Pope  above  a  council.  Here  is  a  palpable 
contradiction  on  the  authority  of  the  Pope. — Again,  the  council 
of  Ephesus  decreed — 

"  That  it  should  not  be  lawful  to  utter,  write,  or  compose  any  other  faith 
than  that  which  had  been  defined  by  the  Nicene  Fathers ;  and  that,  if  any  dared 
to  offer  any  other  creed,  if  ecclesiastics  ^  they  should  be  removed  from  their  office^ 
alienos  esse;  if  laics,  that  they  should  be  anathematized.^^ — (Labb,  et  Cos®* 
Cone.  torn,  iii,  p.  668.) 

Ilere  you  observe  that  the  council  of  Ephesus  deposed 
ecclesiastics  and  anathematized  laics  who  should  compose  any 
other  faith  than  that  which  has  been  defined  by  the  Nicene 
Fathers.  Compare  the  Nicene  Creed  with  that  of  Pope  Pius, 
and  you  will  find  the  latter  differing  from  the  former  in  many 
particulars,  and  containing  many  articles  not  to  be  found' in  the 
Nicene  Creed.  I,  therefore,  without  hesitation  conclude,  that 
we  have  "  the  church"  of  one  age  contradicting  "  the  church" 
of  another  age.  Again — the  second  Nicene  council  declares, 
that  one  reason  for  worshipping  the  image  of  Christ  is,  that  he  is 
not  sensibly  present  with  us,  but  only  in  his  Divinity ; — Act  iv, 
p.  305.  And  the  epistle  of  Germanus,  received  by  the  council, 
says,  that  he  is  not  present  "  afo/jaTtxcug''^  bodily.  It  also  anathe 
matizes  all  who  assert  that  Christ  ivas  not  circumscribed  as  to  hi& 
humanity,  I  ask,  are  not  these  opinions  plainly  opposed  to  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation  1  But  the  church  of  Rome  now 
receives  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  Again,  therefore, 
we  have  "the  church"  of  one  age  against  "the  church"  of 
another  age.  Let  these  contradictions  go  before  the  world,  and 
that  world  will  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  church  of  Rome 
is  not  infallible.  Believe  me,  it  is  this  claim  to  infallibility,  which 
will  give  the  death-blow  to  the  church  of  Rome.  She  dares  not 
alter  a  single  tenet ;  her  doctrines  are  written  as  with  a  diamond 
-  -they  are  engraven  on  tables  of  brass,  and  she  canna  reform 

6* 


66  THE    iMVlNE    RICHT 

I  therefore  repeat  that  her  vain  assumption  of  iii^L  ibility  <vill,  m 
the  dispensations  of  Providence,  give  her  the  death-blow  by 
which  she  shall  fall.  If  then,  there  be  no  infallible  tribunal  in 
existence,  must  we  not  hi  under  the  necessity  of  exercising  our 
r>?ivj»t,(5  judgments. 

^Then  we  talk  of  the  right  of  pri\ate  judgment,  it  should  be 
understood  that  we  mean  no^  that  every  man  is  justified  in  putting 
any  explanation  that  fanc}  may  suggest  on  the  word  of  God. 
— We  must  exercise  our  judgments  as  accountable  beings, 
according  to  the  rules  of  common  sense,  and  the  a*?\alogy  of 
scripture,  with  due  submission  to  the  moral  restraints  arising 
from  the  opinions  of  men  of  sound  understanding  and  piety,-^- 
Do  we  say  that  a  man  who  exercises  his  judgment  on  the  con- 
tents of  any  work  which  he  may  peruse,  is  justified  in  adopting 
the  idle  imaginations  of  his  own  brain  as  the  meaning  of  the 
author  1  No — we  instantly  reject  such  an  absurd  opinion.  But 
in  reading  the  scriptures  we  are  not  only  to  exercise  our  judgment 
with  the  same  care  which  we  would  bestow  upon  other  volumes, 
but  as  beings  accountable  to  God,  and  as  deeply  interested  in  the 
concerns  of  an  eternal  world.  These  are  considerations  by  which 
a  man  is  solemnly  called  upon  to  exercise  his  judgment  upon 
the  subject-matter  of  the  inspired  records — these  are  rules  by 
which,  I  conceive,  he  is  to  be  guided  in  that  exercise.  The 
misinterpretation  of  the  law  of  the  land  is  no  justification  for 
the  commission  of  illegal  acts  ;  nor  will  the  misunderstanding 
of  God's  blessed  word,  on  the  great  fundamental  truths  of  the 
Christian  system,  afford  any  security  to  error,  but  will  expose 
us  to  the  wrath  of  the  great  Eternal.  I  now  come  to  my  direct 
proofs  of  the  right  of  private  judgment.  Truly  it  is  an  extra- 
ordinary question  ;  Am  I  justified  in  employing  my  intellectual 
faculties  ?  Why  are  faculties  bestowed  on  men,  if  they  are  not 
to  be  exercised?  If  I  am  not  to  exercise  them,  is  not  my 
accoutitabihty  destr^.^"«d?  The  church  of  Rome  must  allow 
aer  own  votaries  to  exercise  their  private  judgment  on  the  jt?roo/5 
of  her  authority.  They  must  lay  the  foundation  of  their  system 
on  private  judgment ;  and  if  they  can  lay  the  foundation,  why 
r.hould  they  not  be  competent  to  raise  the  superstructure  1  If 
they  must  exai.  ^ne  the  basis,  why  should  they  not  be  allowed  to 
exercise  their  fcculties  upou  the  nature  of  the  edifice  which  rests 
upon  it  ]  Religion  is  a  personal  matter.  It  is  written  in  the 
word  of  God : 

"  Every  rnaa  ehall  bear  his  own  burden." — Gal.  vi,  6. 
"Every  one  of  us  shall  render  an  account  to  God  for  Ai/nse//."— Rom, 
tiv,  12. 

The  idea  of  an  infallible  tribunal  requires  me  to  give  up  the 
exercise  of  my  facuUies,  in  opposition  to  the  natural  <JonstitutioD 


(&W    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  GT 

of  the  huLnaif.  mind.  I  cannot  believe  any  thing,  except  on 
evidence.  Who  formed  the  mind?  The  Deity.  If  the  exercise 
of  my  judgment,  therefore,  coincides  with  the  natural  constitution 
of  the  mind,  then  to  exercise  that  judgment  must  be  my  noble 
prerogative — must  be  my  bounden  duty.  Gentlemen,  put 
together  these  observations,  and  you  cannot  avoid  coming  to  the 
plain  and  evident  conclusion,  that  there  is  no  infallible  tribunal. 
Are  we  not,  therefore,  thrown  back  upon  our  own  judgments  ? 
Weigh  the  considerations  in  subservience  to  which  the  judgment 
should  be  exercised — the  moral  accountabihty  of  man,  the  voice 
of  common  sense  and  reason — and  will  you  not  join  issue  with 
me,  and  assert,  that  the  exercise  of  private  judgment  is  the  birth- 
right of  every  son  and  daughter  of  Adam  1 

[Jilr.  O^Connell  being  obliged  to  retire  upon  jn^ofessional  business^  the  Chair 
was  taken  in  his  stead  by  Mr.  Hugh  0'  Connor.] 

Mr.  Maguire. — Mr.  Pope  has  commenced  by  making  a 
very  long  complaint  that  he  had  it  not  in  his  power  to  reply  to 
me  yesterday  evening.  It  was  decided  by  the  chair  that  he  had 
no  right  to  reply  ;  and  if  the  time  specified  in  the  regulations 
was  expired,  why  should  he  make  the  demand  ?  By  what  magic 
could  he  transfer  that  right  to  himself,  when  chance  gave  me  the 
opportunity  of  speaking  last?  With  regard  to  what  has  been 
advanced  by  Mr.  Pope  from  Fra  Paolo,  respecting  the  council 
of  Trent,  I  at  once  deny  the  authority  of  such  a  man.  Mr. 
Pope  introduced  yesterday  much  irrelevant  matter,  which  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  question  of  the  infallibility  of  the  church 
of  Rome  ;  and  this  day  he  has  advanced  but  one  or  two  reasons 
for  the  faith  which  he  himself  professes.  He  says,  that  I  have 
not  fjroved  my  church  to  be  the  church  of  Christ ;  I  already 
said,  that  the  question,  then  before  us  was,  not  whether  the 
Catholic  church  was  the  church  of  Christ,  but  whether  Christ 
had  established  a  church  on  earth,  and  endowed  it  with  the  pre- 
rogative of  infallibility  1  The  Protestant  churches,  divided  as 
they  are  upon  the  most  essential  points,  can  lay  no  claim  to 
infallibility.  But  one  church  claims  to  be  infalhble,  and  but  one 
church  possesses  any  pretensions  to  the  title.  No  other  church 
has  even  the  semblance  or  outward  appearance  of  infallibility. 
To  prove  that  Christ  established  an  infallible  church,  I  quoted 
"^rious  texts  of  scripture.  Mr.  Pope  seemed  either  to  be  afraid 
r  ashamed  to  recur  to  scripture  on  the  subject  of  private 
judgment.  I  showed  yesterday  that  what  was  meant  by  the 
church  of  Christ,  was  all  the  churches  in  the  world  holding 
communion  with  the  See  of  Rome,  which  was  deemed  the 
mother  and  matrice  of  all  Christian  churches,  as  St.  Cyprian 
calls  it.     All  the  oiiurches  m  that  communion  form  the  generic 


68  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

term  of  the  church  of  Christ.  Mr.  Pope  again  emleavoured  to 
draw  a  distinction  between  the  Catholic  church  and  the  church 
of  Rome.  I  have  already  shown  the  term  Roman  was  applied 
to  the  Catholic  church  in  order  to  distinguish  her  from  the 
churches  which  the  heretics  set  up  in  opposition.  The  Deists, 
Bi©  doubt,  will  feel  obliged  to  Mr.  Pope  for  the  argument  he  has 
advanced  relative  to  the  salt.  This  argument  was  most  vaunt- 
ingly  put  forward  by  Yoltaire  against  the  Divinitij  of  Christy  and 
the  infallibility  of  his  Apostles.  That  celebrated  infidel,  witl 
blasphemous  flippancy,  declared,  that  Christ  was  a  great  block- 
head to  compare  his  Apostles  to  the  salt  of  the  earth,  as  ar- 
argument  of  their  infallibility,  and  undertook  to  prove  that  the 
salt  can  lose  its  essence,  and  consequently  that  Christ  iva^ 
ignorant  of  chemistry,  and  his  Apostles,  by  their  Master's  own 
comparison,  proved  to  be  fallible.  But  his  shallow  and  ridiculou.* 
arguments  were  triumphantly  refuted  by  Christian  divines. 
Now,  if  Mr.  Pope  can  demonstrate  that  salt  may  lose  its 
savor,  he  will  establish  a  position  equally  fatal  to  the  infallibility 
of  the  Apostles,  and  to  the  divinity  of  Christ  himsef,  Thua 
will  he  elfectuate  a  cordial  union  between  the  representatives 
of  Yoltaire  and  the  followers  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pope.  Catholics^ 
however,  despise  the  argument  of  the  refined  blasphemer,  to 
prove  that  salt  may  be  decomposed,  and  abhor  the  system  te. 
which  its  origin  is  traced. — The  Catholic  has  no  need  to  examine 
the  definitions  of  general  councils — there  are  few  indeed  who 
could  accomplish  that  task,  If  he  be  once  satisfied  that  the 
church  of  Christ  cannot  lead  him  into  error,  he,  like  St.  Augustin, 
rests  with  security  his  faith  upon  her  authority.  She  proposes 
the  dogmas — he  readily  gives  his  assent.  Now,  in  order  to 
convince  himself  of  the  infallibility  of  his  church,  he  has  only  to 
refer  to  the  scripture.  He  finds  multiplied  in  the  sacred  volume 
evident  promises,  which,  if  they  prove  not  infallibility,  are  words 
without  meaning  or  substance.     Christ  says  to  his  Apostle. 

"Thou  art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,  and  the  gates 
of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it." — Matt,  xvi,  18. 

"The  church  is  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  truth." — 1  Tim.  iii,  15. 

"He  that  does  not  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  Heathen  and 
the  Publican." — Matt,  xviii,  18. 

"  I  will  send  you  the  Spirit  of  Truth,  to  teach  you  all  truth." — John  xvi,  13. 

"  I  will  send  you  another  Paraclete,  to  abide  with  you  for  ever." — John 
xiv,  16. 

"  I  shall  be  with  you  all  days,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world." — Matt, 
xxviii,  20. 

If  the  Roman  Catholic  be  not  convinced  from  those  texts  that 
Christ  has  established  an  unerring  church  to  guide  the  ignorant, 
and  to  whom  her  children  are  bound  to  yield  obedience,  I  desire 
to  know  how  can  private  judgment  enable  him  to  decide  upon  Met' 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  6f) 

texts  of  scrij/ture,  not  half  so  strong,  and  assuredly  not  half  so 
gbvioiis, 

Mr.  Pope  says,  that  all  Roman  Catholics  must  examine  vLe 
various  councils  of  his  church,  before  he  can  prudently  make  an 
act  of  faith.  The  reverse,  however,  is  true.  Mr.  Pope  might 
just  as  well  assert,  that  the  lower  order  of  Protestants  should 
not  doubt  of  Catholic  faith,  unless  they  were  able  to  prove  from 
the  acts  of  council  that  the  Catholic  church  is  not  infallible  ;  and 
this,  I  imagine,  he  will  scarcely  admit.  The  faith  of  Roman 
Catholics  rest  upon  the  promises  of  Jesus  Christ  to  his  church, 
which  promises  they  conceive  are  sufficiently  expHcit  to  satisfy 
the  most  sceptic  mind.  It  is  easier  for  a  Catholic  to  ascertain 
this  simple  truth,  viz: — Did  Christ  promise  that  his  church  should 
not  fail  1 — than  for  a  Protestant  to  inquire  and  scrupulously 
examine  into  every  doubt,  and  difficulty,  and  argument.  The 
private  judgment  of  the  ignorant  Catholic  leads  him  to  yield  his 
assent  to  the  authority  of  that  church  wliich  has  formed  the  largest 
society  of  Christians  since  the  coming  of  the  Messiah.  And 
when  he  adds  to  the  authority  of  this  church,  the  corresponding 
authority  of  the  Greek  church,  which  differs  from  his  own  in  no 
article  of  faith,  save  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  feels 
his  motives  of  credibility  confirmed,  and  recognizes  a  safeguard 
for  his  own  conscious  ignorance.  On  the  contrary,  how  can 
illiterate  Protestants,  thousands  of  whom  cannot  even  read, 
ascertain  whether  the  New  Testament  be  an  inspired  work  1 
whether  such  a  text  were  spoken  by  Christ  himself,  or  by  an 
inspired  disciple  1  Is  every  ignorant  peasant  able  to  know  that 
any  particular  book  of  scripture  is  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost? 
Can  the  lower  order  of  Protestants,  {and  it  was  for  the  poor 
especially  that  Christ  instituted  his  church) — can  the  ignorant  and 
illiterate  amongst  the  Protestants,  who  cannot  have  recourse  to 
the  authority  of  that  church  to  which  Christ  gave  the  deposit  of 
faith — that  church  which,  in  what  is  called  the  dark  ages,  when  a 
single  Protestant  was  not  to  he  heard  of,  preserved  the  copies  of  the 
Bible,  and  that  noble  translation  which  St.  Jerome  accomplished, 
fourteen  centuries  before  the  Reformation— I  ask,  will  the  humble 
Protestant,  when  deprived  of  such  assistance,  be  able  to  prove  the 
word  of  God  l  If  not,  and  it  is  plain  he  cannot,  then  '  vana  est 
praedicatio  vestra,  vana  fides  ejus' — '  vain  is  your  preaching,  and 
vain  his  faith.'  As  soon  as  the  Roman  Catholic  ascertains  the 
true  marks  of  Christ's  church,  and  finds  those  marks  to  belong 
exclusively  to  the  Catholic  church,  he  is  at  once  satisfied — he 
believes  it  is  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  he  rests  firm  in 
his  faith.  The  Cathohc  church  has  remained  for  1800  years — 
it  has  defied  all  the  efforts  of  persecution — it  has  survived  the 
wreck  and  shocks  of  time,  a-id  will  defy,  till  the  erd  of  the  world. 


70  ViiE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

all  the  heretic?^  who  may  rise  in  opposition  to  it.  This  proves 
that  is  upheld  by  the  finger  of  God  alone. 

Mr.  Pope  has  said,  that  Innocent  the  Third  forced  the  canons 
upon  the  third  Lateran  council.  He  brought  them  ready  framed 
to  the  council,  and  because,  after  they  ivere  debated,  they  were 
approved  of  by  the  council,  therefore  he  is  to  be  considered  aa 
having  forced  them  on  the  council.  According  to  this  rule,  any 
one  who  should  originate  or  introduce  a  measure  in  the  House 
of  Commons  that  might  afterwards  happen  to  be  passed  into  a 
law,  should  be  considered  as  having  forced  it  on  the  house, 
though  the  measure  had  been  regularly  debated  and  approved 
of.  It  might  as  well  be  said  that  the  regulations  for  this  meetings 
which  had  been  framed  by  Messrs.  Lawless  and  Singer,  and 
which  were  subsequently  approved  of  by  us,  had  been  forced 
upon  us  by  them. 

Mr.  Pope's  assertion,  that  the  Pope  is  able  to  dispense  with 
the  decrees  of  councils,  is  an  unworthy  quibble.  He  quotes 
Delahogue  to  prove  that  the  Pope  has  the  power  of  dispensing 
with  the  canons  of  councils,  but  these  are  canons  which  relate 
to  mere  discipline.  The  council  of  Trent,  for  example,  decreed 
that  no  persons  should  marry  within  four  degrees  of  kindred; 
yet  every  bishop  can  dispense  in  that  degree  of  consanguinity. 
I  have  already  explained  to  you,  that  the  decrees  of  councils  in 
matters  of  discipline  are  not  unalterable  ;  but  they  are  immutable 
in  matters  which  regard  the  deposit  of  faith.  It  would  be  foolish 
and  ridiculous  to  contend  that  the  head  of  the  church  should  not 
have  it  in  his  power  to  dispense  with  the  rules  and  regulations 
of  discipline  which  may  be  enacted  from  time  to  time,  and  prove 
expedient  or  otherwise  according  to  circumstances.  The  Pope 
is  able  to  dispense  with  the  ecclesiastical  law ;  but  neither  the 
Pope  nor  a  general  council  can  change  an  article  of  faith.  I 
here  challenge  Mr.  Pope  to  show  me  where  any  one  of  the 
eighteen  ecumenical  councils  differs  from  the  remainder  in  a 
single  particle  connected  with  faith ;  I  have  already  defied  him 
to  do  so,  and  he  has  not  been  able  to  discover  a  scintilla  of 
difTerence  between  them  in  matters  of  faith.  He  has  had 
recourse  to  the  council  of  Basil ;  that  council  was,  at  first, 
regularly  convened  by  the  Pope,  but  when  it  had  assembled  to 
determine  upon  doctrine,  the  emperor  introduced  into  it  a  phalanx 
of  Arian  bishops.  The  orthodox  bishops  refused  to  sit  with 
them,  and  adjourned  to  another  place.  The  Arian  bishops 
proceeded  to  hold  their  cabal,  and  issued  their  decrees,  and 
fulminated  censures  agains  the  orthodox  bishops.  The  council 
was  ecumenical  in  the  commencement  of  its  sitting,  but  it  was 
forced  to  adjourn  on  account  of  the  rabble  of  Arians  introduced 
by  the  emperor.  - 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  7? 

Mr.  Pope  asserts^  that  Dr.  Doyle  deems  the  noteo  appended 
to  the  Bible  of  no  effect.  Mr.  Pope  is  under  a  palpable  mistake 
with  regard  to  the  commentaries  affixed  to  the  Bible.  No 
Catholic  is  called  upon  to  agree  with  those  notes,  only  as  far 
as  his  private  judgment  may  lead  him  to  do  so.  We  are  not 
inimical  to  the  exercise  of  private  judgment,  where  matters  of 
faith  are  not  concerned  or  endangered.  We  are  allowed  to 
exercise  our  private  judgment  in  other  matters.  Does  it  folio  v, 
because  we  acknowledge  an  infallible  autho-rity  to  decide  upo  i 
matters  of  doctrine^  that  that  authority  should  bind  us  down  in 
other  matters,  and  decree,  for  example,  at  what  particular  tim^ 
or  place  we  should  breakfast  or  dine  ]  The  notes  appended  to 
the  Bible  are  merely  intended  to  explain  to  the  ignorant,  matters 
relating  to  faith  and  morality,  which,  of  themselves,  they  are 
unable  to  explain.  They  are  intended  to  guide,  not  to  lead  the 
judgment,  and  to  assist  the  ignorant  and  unlettered.  There  are 
copious  notes  and  commentaries  to  the  Protestant  Bible.  F 
private  judgment  be  their  sole  rule  of  faith,  why  are  Protestants 
obliged  to  have  notes  and  comments  ]  If  they  be  found  useful 
to  the  Protestant,  why  should  they  not  be  equally  useful  to  the 
Catholic,  who  admits  an  infallible  authority  in  matters  of  faith, 
but  who  can  exercise  his  private  judgment  in  matters  unconnected 
with  faith?  Mr.  Pope  has  again  told  you  that  we  have  no 
authorized  version  of  the  scriptures.  I  have  already  shown  you 
that  we  have  such  a  version.  I  defy  him  to  prove  the  ^Vulgaie^ 
corrupt.  He  has  not,  he  could  not ;  yet  he  repeats  the  assertion. 
And  if  Mr.  Pope's  edition  of  the  Bible  be  deemed  a  regular  and 
genuine  one,  I  contend  that  ours  is  ten  times  more  so.  I  insist, 
that  of  all  editions  of  the  Bible,  ours  is  the  best.  There  may 
be  found  some  verbal  inaccuracies — in  that  respect  I  do  not  say 
it  is  immaculate.  We  have  the  Latin  Vulgate,  the  genuine 
translation  of  the  Bible,  made  by  St.  Jerome,  1400  years  before 
Luther  or  Calvin  were  heard  of.  Mr.  Pope  inquires  how  we 
can  ascertain  when  a  general  council  is  regularly  convened.  It 
is  as  easy  to  ascertain  that  matter,  as  it  is  when  our  British 
Parliament  is  regularly  convened.  When  the  head  of  the 
Catholic  church  regularly  convenes  a  sufficient  number  of 
bishops,  that  assemblage  morally  represents  the  church,  and  its 
decrees  are  admitted  by  Roman  Catholics  as  decrees  of  a 
general  council.  When  the  council  met  at  Jerusalem  to  decide 
upon  circumcision,  they  gave  us  an  examplar  of  a  council — *'  it 
appeared  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  us."  I  never  asserted, 
that  if  the  Pope  approves  of  the  decrees  of  a  council,  they  are 
therefore  infallible.  That  is  contrary  to  Catholic  doctrine. 
What  I  asserted  was,  that  if  the  decrees  of  a  council,  though 
not  a  general  one,  be  admitted  by  the  church  dispersed,  then 


72  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

they  are  infallible.  When  a  general  council  was  regularly 
convened  by  the  Pope,  and  when  no  violence  was  attempted  to 
influence  or  overawe  it  by  Arian  emperors,  then  we  look  upon 
it  as  the  collective  body  of  the  church,  which  decides  according 
to  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Mr.  Pope  asks  what  is 
the  Catholic  church?  It  is  formed  of  all  the  Christian  churches 
throughout  the  world,  in  communion  with  the  See  of  Rome, 
which  is  the  matrice  of  Christianity,  as  St.  Cyprian  called  it. 
St.  Jerome,  writing  to  Pope  Damasus,  says — 

"  From  a  pastor  I  beg  the  defence  of  a  sheep.  I  speak  to  the  fisherman's 
successor,  and  to  the  disciple  of  the  cross — acknowledging  none  but  Christ 
to  be  chief.  I  am  joined  in  communion  with  your  holiness — that  is  with  the 
chair  of  I'eter:  upoi  this  rock  I  know  the  church  was  built.  To  thee  I 
know  were  given  tho  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Whoever  gathereth 
not  with  thee  scattereth,"  &c. 

Mr.  Pope  has  recurred  to  the  council  of  Constance,  which 
deposed  three  Popes.  Now,  the  facts  of  the  case  are  the 
strongest  proof  that  Christ  watches  over  his  church.  One  Pope 
having  been  regularly  elected,  another  was  thrust  into  his  place 
through  the  cabal  of  secular  power,  and  the  real  Pope  driven 
into  banishment  where  he  died.  The  surviving  Pope  was  then 
approved  of,  lest  a  schism  should  be  created  in  the  church. 
The  contest  continued  for  forty  years.  The  Pope  regularly 
elected  by  the  cardinals  was  looked  upon  as  the  real  and  true 
Pope.  The  other  two  Popes  were  called  upon  to  resign  by  the 
council,  and  submitted  to  the  sentence  rather  than  distract  the 
peace  of  the  church.  Could  there  be  a  clearer  proof  that  Christ 
has  always  continued  to  watch  over  his  church. 

Mr.  Pope  rose  and  said — I  really  regret  to  be  obliged  to  say, 
that  there  has  been  either  misconception  or  misrepresentation 
on  the  part  of  my  learned  friend.  What  I  have  advanced  as  to 
the  uncertainty  of  Councils,  has  not  been  built  on  Father  Paul's 
History  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  but  on  the  testimony  of  Dela- 
hogue,  in  his  "  Tractatus  de  Ecclesia,"  (which  is  the  manual 
of  the  college  of  Maynooth,)  and  upon  the  authority  of  cardinal 
Bei^armine.  Mr.  Maguire  says,  that  I  have  brought  forward 
:_o  contradictions.  Is  this  the  case  1  When  we  find  one  council 
'  ef  osing  three  Popes  as  anti-popes,  and  setting  up  another  in 
1  eir  place,  and  the  power  of  a  council  over  the  Pope,  practi- 
^•ally  recognized  in  the  approval  of  the  measure  by  the  general 
church  of  Rome  ;  and  when  the  councils  of  Trent  and  Florence, 
on  the  other  hand,  decree  that  the  Pope  is  above  a  council — is 
there  not  council  against  council?  Again — all  who  added  to  the 
iVicene  creed,  were  condemned  by  the  council  of  Ephesus ; 
vhile  the  creed  of  Pope  Pius,  which  contains  many  articbs  ot 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMKNT.  73 

faith,  not  to  be  found  m  the  Nicene  croed,  is  received  by  tno 
church  of  Rome.  Here  then  is  "  the  church"  of  one  age 
against  "  the  church"  of  another.  The  second  Nicene  council 
assigned  as  a  reason  for  the  worship  of  images,  that  Christ  is 
not  sensibly  present  on  earth,  but  onhj  in  his  divinity  ;  and  the 
epistle  of  Germanus,  received  by  that  council,  asserts,  that 
Christ  is  not  present  with  us  "  bodily.^^  It  also  anathematized 
all  who  declare,  that  Christ  was  not  circumscribed  as  to  his 
humanity.  Are  not  these  declarations  opposed  to  the  doctrine 
of  transubstantiation;  and  do  they  not  prove  that  "  the  church" 
of  one  age  has  contradicted  "  the  church"  of  another  ? 

My  opponent  has  said,  that  I  am  afraid  to  meet  him  on  the 
grounds  of  scripture.  I  should  rejoice,  if  we  confined  ourselves 
to  the  law  and  to  the  testimony.  In  appealing  to  Fathers, 
councils,  and  ecclesiastical  writers,  I  am  departing  from  my  own 
ground.  If  I  weigh  the  church  of  Rome  in  "  Divine  Balance," 
as  St.  Augustin  calls  the  sacred  scriptures,  (De  Bapt.  cont. 
Donat.  1.  ii.  c>  6,)  the  scale  in  which  the  church  of  Rome  might 
happen  to  be  placed,  would  soon  be  raised  aloft.  With  respect 
to  Judas,  I  stated  that  he  was  one  to  whom  the  Lord  addressed 
the  words,  "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth,"  in  evidence  that  he 
did  not  thereby  intend  to  describe  the  infallibility  of  the  Apostles. 
Far  be  it  from  me  to  deny,  that  the  Apostles  were  infallible.  As 
to  the  expression  "  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth,"  I  would  ask, 
when  Basil,  (in  his  70th  epistle)  speaking  of  the  persecution  of 
the  churches  in  Cappadocia  calls  them  "  pillars  and  ground  of 
truth,"  did  he  mean  to  say  that  each  church  was  infallible  1  As 
to  my  friend's  justification  of  the  conduct  of  Pope  Innocent  at 
the  Lateran  council,  he  should  remember,  that  although  ministers 
often  bring  bills  into  Parliament,  yet  are  the  bills  discussed 
before  they  are  passed  into  a  law  ;  and  it  is  well  known,  that 
ministers  do  not  always  succeed  in  their  measures.  The  canons 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  church  refer  to  matters  of  faith  as  well  as 
discipline.  In  the  Class-book  of  Maynooth,  and  in  Butler,  no 
exception  is  made  with  respect  to  the  dispensing  power  of  the 
.Pope  not  relating  to  canons  containing  articles  of  faith. 

One  circumstance  in  addition  to  those  which  I  have  already 
Advanced,  shall  now  be  considered,  in  order  to  show  that  the 
church  of  Rome  is  not  infallible.  Where  the  spirit  of  truth  is, 
there  shall  we  find  the  fruits  of  righteousness.  Hermanus  Von 
Der  Hardt  informs  us,  that  others  besides  divines  and  grave 
secular  men  attended  Constance  during  the  council — to  wit — 
barbersj  three  hundred  and  six,  players,  jesters,  three  hundred 
and  forty-six,  pastry-cooks,  three  hundred  and  twenty-five,  and 
harlots,  seven  hundred !  !  ( Yid.  Herm.  Yon  Der  Hardt  de  Rebu3 
Universalis  Concilii  GGrMarittnensis,  Tom.  v,  et  Gerardi  Dacheri 

7 


74  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

Constantinensis  Historiam  Magnatum  in  Constan.  Cone,  ex 
MSS.  Vindobonensi  Caesareo.)  The  character  of  the  council 
of  Trent  is  drawn  by  one  of  its  members,  Duditheiis,  bishop 
of  five  churches,  who  writing  to  the  emperor  Maximillian  II 
gives  this  account : 

"  We  daily  saw  hungry  and  needy  bishops  come  to  Trent ;  youths  for  th« 
most  part  which  did  begin  to  have  beards,  (grave  and  sage  divines!)  given 
over  to  luxury  and  riot,  hired  only  to  give  their  voices  as  the  pope 
PLEASED.  They  were  unlearned  and  simple  yet  fit  for  their  purpose  in  regara 
of  their  impudent  boldness. 

In  one  of  the  early  sessions  of  the  council,  when  there  were 
present  only  forty-eight  bishops ;  they  decreed  the  authority  of 
the  Vulgate,  of  tradition,  and  of  the  Apocrypha. — Father  Paul, 
who  was  never  excommunicated  that  I  am  aware  of,  says : 

"  Some  thought  it  strange  that  five  cardinals  and  forty-eight  bishops  should 
have  so  easily  defined  the  most  important  and  principal  points  of  religion, 
which  till  then,  had  never  been  decided  ;  giving  canonical  authonty  to  books 
considered  uncertain  and  apocryphal ;  rendering  authentic  a  translation, 
differing  from  the  original  text,  and  instructing  and  prescribing  the  manner 
of  understanding  the  word  of  God.  »N*or  was  there  amongst  the  prelates  any 
one  xoorthy  of  attention  from  his  learning.  There  were  some  lawyers,  learned, 
perhaps,  in  that  profession,  but  unskilled  in  religion — a  few  theologians,  but 
these  of  less  than  ordinary  talent,  the  greater  number  gentlemen,  or  cottrtiers; 
and  as  to  their  dignities,  some  were  only  titular — the  greater  part,  bishops  of 
so  small  a  place,  that  considering  each  to  represent  his  own  people,  it  could 
not  be  said  that  one  thousandth  part  of  the  Christian  world  were  represented. 

Is  it  not  an  insult  to  common  sense  to  suppose,  that  you  could 
for  a  moment  regard  assemblies,  composed  of  such  characters 
capable  of  deciding  infallibly  upon  articles  of  faith,  and  oi 
Oi  lightening  the  world  upon  the  great  truths  of  salvation?  No 
— never  can  I  entertain  such  an  extravagant,  such  a  monstrous 
;il>surdity.  The  light  of  the  nineteenth  century,  believe  me,  will 
pour  its  mighty  rays  upon  the  church  of  Rome,  and  expose  it  in 
all  its  naked  deformity  to  the  world. 

My  friend  has  told  us,  that  tvc  may  exercise  our  private  judg- 
ment upon  the  notes  of  the  BiblCj  provided  they  refer  not  to  matters 
cf  faith.  It  is  not  always  easy  to  distinguish  between  matters 
of  faith  and  other  articles.  But  what  shall  we  say  as  to  morals  ? 
At  a  full  meeting  of  the  Roman  Catholic  board,  held  in  Decem- 
ber, 1816,  the  notes  of  an  edition  of  the  Douay  Bible,  which 
had  just  appeared,  were  pronounced  by  a  gentleman  who  has 
just  left  the  chair,  as  containing  damnable  doctrines.  The  same 
indi\idual  declared,  that  he  would  not  continue  within  the  pale 
of  the  church  of  Rome,  if  those  notes  were  not  publicly  disavowed. 
The  Roman  Catholic  hierarchy  have  not  hcwever  protested 
against  them.  I  would  ask  in  this  place,  does  not  the  opinion, 
that  notes  are  indispensably  necessary  for  the  right  understanding 
of  the  sacred  volume,  imply,  that  the  word  of  man  is  more  intel- 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  75 

Iigibl(3  tnan  the  word  of  the  living  God?  Mr.  Maguire  observed 
that  Protestants  also  have  notes  appended  to  their  Bibles. 
Surely  a  Protestant  does  not  act  inconsistently  with  his  principles 
when  he  consults  a  commentator.  I  may  avail  myself  of  the 
light  which  a  fellow-man  throws  upon  a  passage  of  scripture, 
without  deeming  him  infallible.  My  friend  has  again  asserted, 
that  his  translation  is  the  genuine  version.  Is  his  version 
genuine,  when  it  contradicts  the  original?  I  submit  to  the 
learned  world,  to  decide,  whether  the  Douay  version  be  more 
correct  than  the  Protestant  Bible.  I  have  already  referred  to 
the  passage  relative  to  Jacob  w^orshipping  his  staff.  Is  "pen- 
ance" a  correct  rendering  of  the  word  "^eTwyom,"  which 
obviously  signifies  a  change  of  mind  1  I  shall  be  told,  perhaps, 
that  the  Vulgate  renders  "  ijeiavoelv^^  "  agere  penitentiam." 
But  who  is  so  ignorant  of  Latin,  as  not  to  know,  that  "agere 
otium"  signifies  "  to  be  at  leisure  ;"  "Agere  vitam,"  "  to  live  ?" 
and  so  I  would  translate  "  Agere  penitentiam,"  "  to  repent." 

It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  Delahogue  does  not  number 
among  the  eighteen  general  councils,  the  council  of  Jerusalem, 
as  the  Roman  Catholic  divines  designate  the  assembly  at  Jeru- 
salem. Let  my  friend  adduce  the  same  proofs  of  the  inspiration 
of  councils,  as  those  which  the  Apostles  exhibited,  and  then  shall 
we  bow  down  to  their  authority.  I  am  asked  how  the  poor  man 
is  to  decide  whether  the  Bible  be  the  word  of  God  1  I  would 
premise,  that  the  right  to  do  a  thing  and  the  poiver  to  io  it,  are 
very  different,  I  may  have  a  right  to  go  to  the  East  Indies, 
and  yet  be  unable  to  undertake  so  long  a  voyage.  Therefore 
I  again  repeat,  that  the  right  to  do  a  thing,  and  the 
POWER  to  do  it,  are  VERY  DIFFERENT.  I  am  asked,  how 
the  poor  man  is  to  decide  whether  the  Bible  be  the  word  of 
God  ?  As  to  the  poor  Protestant  or  Roman  Catholic,  when  I 
present  them  with  a  copy  of  the  Scriptures,  they  will  probably 
be  found  to  be  already  in  possession  of  some  general  notion  of 
its  inspiration.  I  shall  take  a  still  more  extreme  case  :  I  shall 
consider  the  situation  of  a  person  in  a  distant  country,  who  has 
been  previously  altogether  ignorant  of  the  existence  of  the  word 
of  life — illiterate,  but  capable  of  reading.  I  present  him  with 
the  sacred  scriptures,  and  remark,  that  a  perusal  of  their  con- 
tents will  convince  him  that  the  volume  has  proceeded  from 
God.  The  man  feels  himself  to  be  a  sinner,  and  a  depraved 
creature ;  he  witnesses  daily  proofs  of  human  mortality,  but 
unacquainted  with  the  scenes  which  lie  beyond  the  grave, 
peoples  them  with  the  visions  of  his  own  distempered  imagi- 
nation. The  inspired  records  meet  the  circumstances  in  which 
he  is  placed,  by  making  known  peace  and  pardon  through  9 
Saviour's  blood,  and  bv  throwing  a  flood  of  light  over  \>^  pre* 


76  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

sent  and  evenusting  destinies.  Surely  if  we  can  discover  the 
existence  of  God  from  the  works  of  his  hands,  we  may  doubt- 
less expect,  if  the  Bible  have  come  from  Him,  that  it  contains 
such  proofs  of  its  divine  origin,  that  the  sinner  shall  be  con- 
istrained  to  acknowledge  "  God  has  spoken  of  a  truth,"  and  to 
say  cf  the  Bible,  as  the  woman  of  Samaria  said  of  the  Redeemer, 
"  Come,  see  a  man  that  told  me  all  that  ever  I  did  ;  is  not  this  the 
Christ?"  The  inspired  volume  penetrates  the  inmost  recesses 
of  the  heart,  lays  open  the  secrets  of  the  sou\.  discovers  a  man 
to  himself,  and  carries  its  own  witness  that  it  has  emanated  from 
the  Fountain  of  Light.  I  would  also  remark,  that  the  written 
word  is  not  the  only  means  which  God  has  provided  for  the 
instruction  of  man.  He  has  also  appointed  the  preaching  of 
his  Gospel.  The  individual  who  has  received  the  knowledge 
of  salvation  through  the  medium  of  oral  instruction,  finds  no 
difficulty  in  receiving  the  sacred  oracles  as  an  inspired  volume. 
He  approaches  them  with  a  spiritual  appetite,  and  experiences 
the  word  of  truth  to  be  the  life  and  comfort  of  his  soul.  "  As 
well,"  will  he  exclaim,  "  as  well  might  you  endeavour  to  per- 
suade me,  that  there  is  no  light  nor  warmth  in  the  sun,  as  to  tell 
me,  that  no  spiritual  consolation  flows  from  the  doctrines  con- 
tained in  this  blessed  volume." 

This  is  an  extrem.e  case — I  have  met  it;  but  permit  me  to 
say,  that  there  are  innumerable  proofs  of  the  authenticity, 
mtegrity,  and  canonicity  of  the  inspired  volume — and  I  am 
jeady,  when  called  upon  to  state  them.  I  now  ask  Mr.  Ma- 
guire,  by  what  mode  he  would  prove  to  an  individual  in  circum- 
stances similar  to  those  which  we  have  been  considering,  that 
the  Bible  is  a  divine  revelation  ?  Mark  this  question  Mr.  Ma- 
guire,  and  let  me  have  an  answer. 

Is  it,  let  me  ask,  the  case,  that  infidels  and  atheists  are  chiefly 
found  among  the  Protestant  poor  ?  Need  I  reply  in  the  negative? 
Vv'ho  have  been  the  authors  of  heresies  ?   Dupin  informs  us — 

"  If  there  be  obscure  and  difficult  parts  in  the  Bible,  it  is  not  generally  the 
simple  who  abuse  them,  but  the  proud  and  learned  who  make  a  bad  use  of 
them.  For  in  fine  it  is  not  the  ignorant  and  the  simple  who  have  formed 
heresies  in  perverting  the  word  of  God. — They  who  do  so,  are  generally  bishops^ 
priests,  learned  and  enlightened  persons.  So  that  so  far  from  knowing  \iy 
experience,  that  the  reading  of  the  scriptures  is  dangerous  to  the  simple  and 
the  ignorant,  one  may  aay,  that  we  learn  therefrom  that  it  seldom  causes  any 
but  the  learned  to  fall  into  error,  and  that  the  simple  have  generally  found  there 
nothing  but  what  is  edifying  and  instructive.''^  —Dissert  prelim,  siir  la  Bible, 
B.  i,  c.  9.  Par.  1701. 

Cardinal  Bellarnnne  writes  as  iollows : 

"  Heresies  originate  with  men  of  the  upper  rank  rather  than  with  persona 
belonging  to  the  inferior  classes.  Beyond  a  doubt  almost  all  autJwrs  of  heresies 
have  been  either  bishops  or  presbyters  (or  as  some  would  perhaps  translate  it, 
priests.)     Heresies  are  therefore  to  be  considere  I  as  the  factions  of  leading 


CF    PRIVATE    /UDGMENT.  77 

men,  without  whom  there  would  be  no  popular  revolts  in  the  church." — De 
Romano  Pont.  1.  i,  c.  8,  ultima  editio  ab  ipso  Authore  Recocrnita.  Colonias 
fol.  1620,  torn,  i,  p.  527. 

The  people,  I  maintain,  are  the  safest  depositaries  of 
God's  blessed  Word.  Ecclesiastics  may  be  tempted  to  per- 
vert it ;  the  poor  are  not  likely  to  suffer  such  a  temptation.  If, 
therefore,  the  liability  of  the  sacred  scriptures  to  perversion, 
furnish  a  just  reason  for  withdrawing  the  inspired  volume  from 
any  portion  of  the  community,  it  should  be  taken  from  ecclesi* 
astics  who  have  abused  it,  and  put  into  the  hands  of  the  poor 
and  the  unlettered. 

The  church  of  Rome,  where  she  is  dominant,  may  succeed 
by  the  strong  hand  of  ecclesiastical  despotism  in  repressing  the 
outward  expression  of  opinion.  Have  you  never  heard  of  Jews 
abroad,  in  order  to  avoid  persecution,  entering  the  priesthood, 
and  while  celebrating  mass,  cursing  the  power  which  obliges 
them  to  act  in  opposition  to  their  conscience  ]  The  Rev.  Joseph 
Bianco  White,  who  was  chaplain  to  the  king  of  Spain,  now  a 
clergyman  of  the  church  of  England,  and  who  lived  in  the  com- 
munion of  the  church  of  Rome,  twenty-five  years  in  sincere 
submission,  and  ten  in  secret  rebellion  against  her  authority,  in 
his  "  Evidence  against  Catholicism,"  2d  edit.  p.  7,  writes  thus— 

*^  At  the  end  of  a  year  from  the  preaching  of  this  sermon — the  confession 
is  painful,  indeed,  yet  due  to  religion  itself — I  loas  bordering  upon  atheism. 
If  in/  case  were  singular,  if  my  knowledge  of  the  most  enlightened  classes 
Df  Spain  did  not  furnish  me  with  a  multitude  of  sudden  transitions  from 
sincere  faith  and  piety  to  the  most  outrageous  infidelity :  I  would  submit  to 
the  Gambling  conviction,  that  either  weakness  of  judgment,  or  fickleness  of 
character  had  been  the  only  source  of  my  errors.  But  though  I  am  not  at 
hberty  to  mention  individual  cases,  I  do  attest,  from  the  most  certain  know- 
ledge,"that  the  history  of  my  own  mind  is,  with  little  variation,  that  of  a  great 
portion  of  the  Spaiiish  Clergy.  The  fact  is  certain;  I  make  no  individual 
charge ;  every  one  who  comes  within  this  general  description  may  still  wear 
the  mask,  which  no  Spaniard  can  throw  o^  without  bidding  an  eternal  fare- 
well to  his  country." 

The  church  of  Rome  may  look  in  some  measure  fair  and 
united ;  but  within,  the  system  is  full  of  dead  men's  bones  and 
ail  uncleanness. 

I  now  call  upon  Mr.  Maguire  to  inform  us,  by  what  mode  the 
pooi  man  can  know  according  to  his  views,  tb^it  the  Bible  is  the 
book  of  God. 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  wish  Mr.  Pope  would  afford  me  something 
tangible  to  comment  upon.  I  fling  back  his  Protestant  and 
Huguenot  authorities.  I  was  not  a  little  astonished  to  hear 
Mr.  Pope  quote  that  a{  estate,  Blanco  White,  as  an  authority 
against  the  Catholic  church.  I  assert  that  the  man  who  lived 
for  ten  years,  according  to  his  own  testimony,  an  atheist  at 

7* 


/5  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

heart,  is  nc^.  worthy  of  credence,  when  testifying  against  the 
Roman  Catholic  church.  Mr.  Pope  has  again  quoted  from 
Dr.  Delahogue ;  but  when  he  proves  that  Dr.  Delahogue  has 
written  any  thing  contrary  to  CathoKc  faith,  he  will  certainly 
have  achieved  much.  Mr.  Pope  nas  endeavoured  to  make  a 
point  about  the  word  /ustavoia.  It  is  the  Greek  word  for  doing 
penance,  and  it  is  used  in  the  passage  quoted  from  the  sacred 
volume,  in  reference  to  the  men  of  Nineveh,  of  whom  Christ 
says  "  the  men  of  Nineveh  shall  rise  in  judgment  with  this 
generation,  and  shall  condemn  it ;  because  they  did  penance  at 
the  preaching  of  Jonas  :"  the  Protestant  translation  has  it 
"  because  they  repented."  Our  Saviour  in  that  passage  alluded 
to  the  repentance  of  the  men  of  Nineveh — what  was  that  repent- 
ance 1  They  did  penance  in  sackcloth  and  ashes  ;  they  fasted 
for  three  days ;  and  they  did  not  even  suffer  their  cattle  to  eat 
any  thing  during  that  period  .  and  we  find  it  recorded  in  the 
sacred  volume,  that  their  repentance,  or  penance,  disarmed  the 
wrath  of  God.  Fasting  and  praying  are  thrown  overboard  now- 
a-days,  when  we  have  the  liberty  of  the  gospel.  Pampering  the 
body  is  now  the  plan,  and  good  works  are  scouted  as  being 
things  of  supererogation.  It  is  only  in  the  Catholic  church  we 
find  fasting  and  praying  practised. 

Mr.  Pope  says,  that  a  number  of  harlots  came  to  the  council 
of  Trent,  and  he  quotes  Fra  Paolo,  an  historian  than  whose 
authority  he  could  not  produce  worse.  I  could  relate  disgrace- 
ful facts  of  another  church,  matters  which  rest  not  upon  the  ipse 
dixit  of  a  partial  historian,  but  which  are  well  known  to  have 
occured.  I  shall  not,  however,  insult  this  meeting,  nor  pullute 
my  lips  with  the  recital  of  such  filthy  impurities.  It  was,  to  say 
the  least  of  it,  a  breach  of  good  manners  on  the  part  of  Mr. 
Pope  towards  the  ladies  who  are  present,  to  introduce  the 
scandalous  frabrication  of  thai  faithless  historian.  I  will  not 
disgrace  my  situation  here  and  in  the  church,  by  descending  to 
such  arguments.  I  could,  if  I  pleased,  quote  much  to  you 
about  Henry  the  Eighth,  and  the  Virgin  Elizabeth.  I  could 
tell  you  matters  of  fact  with  regard  to  those  patrons  of  the 
reformation — and,  indeed,  I  might,  by  the  relation  of  a  few  facts, 
take  ample  revenge  upon  my  antagonist. 

Mr.  Pope  talks  of  there  having  been  hungry  bishops  at  the 
council  of  Trent : — that  is  a  charge  that  cannot  be  made  against 
the  Protestant  bishops  of  the  present  day,  who  have  got  the 
tithes  and  the  green  acres.  I  would  warn  the  Protestant 
bishops  and  clergy,  who  are  in  possession  of  the  good  things,^ 
how  they  allow  the  principle  which  Mr.  Pope  advocates  to 
spread  throughout  the  land.  If  every  man  is  to  be  allowed  to 
think  for  himself  on  matters  of  faith,  it  will  then  come  to  bo 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  79 

asked,  why  do  we  pay  j£r800,000  a  year  for  the  maintenance  of 
an  useless  clergy  1  "  Let  us  fling  away  the  tithes,"  it  will  be 
said — these  men  have,  on  their  own  showing,  no  right  to  dictate 
to  us  on  matters  of  reUgion — and  as  we  do  not  want  them,  why 
should  v/e  bo  so  enormously  taxed  for  their  support."  Such 
will  be  the  consequences,  if  the  Protestant  clergy,  instead  of 
opposing,  actually  countenance  and  support  the  principles 
advocated  by  Mr.  Pope.  What  says  a  Protestant  Clergymnr', 
the  Rev.  Mr.  O'Callaghan,  upon  this  subject  ? 

"  When  Mr.  Pope  and  Dr.  Singer,  men  indeed  of  high  character,  and  by 
far  the  ablest  advocates  of  the  Bible  Society,  at  least  in  Ireland — when  men 
of  this  description,  dangerous  in  proportion  to  their  great  intellectual  and 
literary  calibre,  are  led  away  by  the  prevailing  delusion,  and  not  ashamed  to 
tell  the  world  that  *  the  right  of  an  ignorant  labourer  to  read  the  Bible,  involves 
his  right  of  interpreting  it* — why  is  the  church  silent?  Why  does  she  not 
address  them  in  her  proper  organ,  if  such  still  exist,  to  the  following  effect: — 
*  Reverend  brethren,  your  argument  is  fallacious,  and  it  is  our  bounden  duty 
to  tell  you  so.  Most  true  it  is  that  a  poor  labourer  has  a  right  to  read  the 
Bible  for  the  health  of  his  soul,  and  to  bathe  in  the  sea  for  the  health  of  his 
body.  His  right  to  bathe  is  as  clear  as  his  right  to  read — his  right  to  go  into 
the  water  also  implies  his  right  to  swim ;  but  if  he  swim  very  imperfectly,  or 
not  at  all,  we  hope  you  will  allow  that  his  efforts  to  swim  would  be  danger- 
ous, nay,  fatal,  and  that  he  should  not  proceed  more  than  chin-deep. 

"  Y'ou  friends  of  Christianity  beware  of  Bible  Societies  every  where — you 
friends  of  peace  and  good-will  among  men  beware  of  Bible  Societies,  and 
other  proselytizing  associations,  especially  in  Ireland?  Remember  their 
great  principle  that  has  nearly  extinguished  Christianity  in  what  is  called 
Protestant  Germany — be  wise  in  time,  farewell! !" 

Mr.  O'Callaghan,  a  gentleman  of  talents  and  extensive  inform- 
ation says,  that  the  right  of  private  judgment  is  not  recognised 
in  the  church  of  England.  Here  we  have  a  Protestant  ecclesi- 
astic arrayed  against  the  doctrine  which  is  preached  up  by  Mr. 
Pope,  who  is  a  Protestant,  but  not  an  ecclesiastic,  Mr.  Pope 
has  spoken  of  infideUty  being  a  consequence  of  Popery.  I 
hold  in  my  hand  a  sermon  preached  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Rose  in  the 
college  of  Cambridge,  and  dedicated  to  the  bishop  of  Chester ;  in 
this  sermon  he  thus  describes  the  state  of  Protestant  Germany : — 

"  From  the  state  of  Protestantism  in  Germany,  a  stronger,  and  perhaps 
more  important  lesson  is  offered  on  that  subject,  which  is  said  to  form  the 
base  and  the  boast  of  Protestantism — the  right  of  private  judgment.  The 
terrible  evils  resulting  in  the  German  church  from  its  exercise,  are  the 
strongest  practical  proof  of  the  wisdom  and  necessity  of  restraining  it. 
Among  the  German  divines  it  is  a  favourite  doctrine  that  it  is  impossible  there 
could  have  been  a  miracle,  and  the  words  of  scripture  are  examined  and 
forced  into  any  meaning  but  their  own.  By  some  the  miracles  are  said  to 
be,  that  mythology  which  must  attend  every  religion  to  gain  the  attention  of 
the  multitude;  by  some  the  common  and  well  known  ribaldry  of  the  infidel 
is  unsparingly  used ;  by  one  or  more,  high  in  station  in  the  church,  some 
artifice,  and  probably  magnetism  has  been,  even  within  the  last  ten  years, 
suggested ;  others  go  so  far  as  to  attack  the  whole  body  of  the  prophets  as 
Impostors,  in  most  outrageous  and  revolting  terms.  This  doctrine  is  taught 
by  divine?  from  the  pulpit — by  professors  from  the  chairs  of  theology — it  is 


80  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

addressed  to  the  old  to  free  them  from  anc'ent  prejudices,  and  to  the  young 
as  the  knowledge  which  can  make  them  truly  wise.  This  abdication  of 
Christianity  is  not  confined  either  to  the  Lutheran  or  Calvinist  profession, 
but  extends  its  baneful  and  withering  influence  with  baneful  force  over  each. 
It  is  curious  to  observe  in  what  way  they  get  rid  of  all  miracles.  Professor 
Paulus,  in  his  Critical  Commentary  assures  us,  that  the  man  with  the  with- 
ered hand  had  only  a  luxation  of  the  shoulder,  which  Jesus  perceiving,  pulled 
it  into  joint." 

Professor  Schultness  explains  this  miracle  as  follows  : 
"  The  man  had  a  severe  rheumatism ;  Christ  observing  that  his  blood  was 
much  moved,  by  the  indignation  with  which  he  heard  the  question  of  the 
Pharisees,  said  to  him  in  that  favorable  moment,  "Stretch  out  thine  hand;' 
the  man  attempted  to  do  it,  and  was  healed  because  that  extraordinary 
excitement  had  removed  the  impediment  under  which  he  laboured.  When 
Christ  restored  sight  to  the  blind  man,  the  poor  fellov/  had  such  weakness  in 
his  eye-lids,  that  he  could  not  keep  his  eyes  open.  Christ  observing  that  h« 
never  made  the  attempt  to  open  them,  said  to  him,  *  Thou  shalt  open  thine 
eyes ;'  the  confidence  of  the  man  was  so  great,  that  making  the  attempt  with 
all  his  might,  he  opened  his  eyes.  Christ  never  walked  in  the  waves,  but  on 
the  shore,  or  he  swam  behind  the  ship,  or  he  walked  through  the  shallows. 
The  daughter  of  Jairus  was  not  dead,  because  Christ  himself  said  'She 
slcepeth.'"  When  Jesus  said  to  Peter,  'Thou  shalt  catch  a  fish,  and  find  in 
his  mouth  a  piece  of  money,'  the  meaning  is,  before  you  can  sell  it  for  so 
much,  you  must  open  its  mouth  and  take  out  the  hook.  At  Cana  in  Galli- 
lee,  Jesus  gave  a  nuptial  present  of  very  fine  wine,  with  which,  for  a  joke,  he 
filled  the  water-pots  of  stone.  The  paralytic  was  an  idle  fellow,  who  for 
thirty  years  had  moved  neither  hand  nor  foot.  Christ  asked  him  ironically, 
'Perhaps  thou  wouldst  be  whole?'  This  irony  stirred  him  up  ; — he  forgot  his 
hypocrisy." 

But  let  us  for  .a  moment  look  at  home  ;  see  the  numerous 
sects  spread  throughout  the  land — the  Seekers,  the  Jumpers, 
the  Methodists,  the  Southcotonians,  &c,  &:c  ;  all  differing  more 
from  each  other,  than  does  the  Catholic  from  the  Protestant 
church.  They  afford  a  rare  specimen  of  that  chaos  of  reform, 
that  Babel  of  interpretation,  which  is  generated  by  the  exercise 
of  private  judgment. 

A  question  has  been  put  to  me,  as  to  the  means  by  which  I 
would  attempt  to  convert  the  pagan  ;  I  will  tell  you  in  plain 
terms  the  course  I  would  adopt.  I  would  present  him  wil-h  the 
Bible  ;  he  would  ask  what  book  that  was?  I  would  tell  him 
that  it  was  inspired  by  God,  and  left  by  him  to  man  as  a  help 
towards  the  salvation  of  his  soul,  and  to  instruct  him  in  doctrine 
and  morahty.  He  would  then  inquire  by  what  means  I  knew 
that  this  was  the  book  of  God.  I  would,  in  reply,  address  him 
as  a  rational  man  ;  I  would  tell  him  that  the  author  of  that  book 
had  descended  from  heaven — had  takon  upon  him  the  figure  of 
mortal  man — that  he  declared  himself  the  Messiah  of  God,  and 
the  Redeemer  come  to  save  the  world,  and  that  he  proved  his 
divine  mission  by  the  most  astonishing  miracles  that  ever  yet 
were  wrought.  He  would  then  ask,  how  did  I  know  those  facts 
occurred,  and  that  such  miracles  were  performed.      I  would 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  81 

appeal  to  the  positive  evidence  of  contemporary  writers,  whom 
for  the  moment  I  should  not  consider  inspired.  I  would  appeal 
to  ttie  scripture  as  an  historical  record.  I  would  show  that  it 
pos.sessed  historical  truth — that  the  Jews  never  controverted  its 
accuracy.  I  would,  in  fine,  appeal  to  the  common  consent  of 
marikind,  to  the  inhabitants  of  distant  and  different  nations, 
subject  to  different  passions,  manners,  and  habits,  speaking  quite 
different  languages,  and  having  no  communication,  verbal  or 
v/ritien.  I  would  ask  him,  was  he  ready  to  believe,  that  all 
thos'i  individuals,  historians,  and  nations,  had  conspired  to  attest 
a  deliberate  falsehood,  to  impose  upon  the  whole  world,  and  of 
course  upon  their  children,  and  children's  children,  a  book 
purporting  to  be  the  work  of  God,  but  in  reality  a  book  of  lies, 
falsehood,  and  false  miracles  ?  iVs  soon  as  I  convinced  him 
that  Christ  wrought  the  miracles,  attributed  to  him  in  that  book, 
(and  how  could  he  doubt  these  miracles,  when  they  were  admitted 
botn  by  Jews  and  Gentiles  ?)  I  would  point  out  to  him  the 
many  clear,  manifest,  and  obvious  texts  in  scripture,  by  which  a 
church  was  proved  to  be  founded  and  established  by  Christ,  and 
endowed  tcith  auihoi'ity  to  teach,  and  the  most  solemn  assurances 
that  it  would  never  teach  error.  I  would  prove  from  clear  and 
obv'v^'us  texts  of  scripture,  and  more  clear  and  obvious  texts 
could  not  be  quoted  in  support  of  any  doctrine  of  the  Christian 
religion,  that  the  church  of  Christ  could  never  teach  error  to 
manldnd.  He  would  then  have  only  to  examine  these  texts  as 
to  thj  alleged  authority  of  the  churCh,  and,  this  one  truth  admitted, 
all  his  doubts  and  difficulties  upon  these  points  would  instantly 
disappear.  The  quibbles  and  objections  raised  by  the  deists 
agamst  the  sacred  volume  would  vanish  in  a  trice  ;  and  con- 
scious of  his  own  incapacity,  and  having  no  alternative  but  to 
eubuiit  to  authority,  or  by  renouncing  authority  to  reject  alt 
mysteries,  he  ivould  follow  the  church,  as  a  safe  and  certain  guide- 
But  how  would  Mr.  Pope  convert  the  pagan.  Mr.  Pope  woufd 
tell  liim  that  the  Bible  is  the  book  of  God.  The  pagan  will 
natuially  ask  him,  how  does  he  know  it  to  be  such  ?  Mr.  Pope, 
in  reply,  would  appeal  to  a  certain  illumination  of  the  spirit — a 
rath'-.r  uncertain  standard,  it  must  be  allowed,  for  a  poor  ignorant 
uncG'jiverted  pagan.  It  is  an  argument,  to  say  the  least  of  it 
ad  ahsurdum, 

Mr.  Pope  must  then  have  recourse  to  authorities.  This  is  al' 
I  want.  If  he  receive  the  Bible  as  the  work  of  God,  upon 
authority,  then  he  establishes  the  necessity  of  authority  in  the 
Chriotian  world.  If  then,  he  says  that  he  cannot  otherwise 
provv?  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  scriptures  :  then  I  ask  him, 
how  can  an  act  of  supernatural  faith  be  founded  upon  human 
fallible  authority.     The  infidel,  on  the  contrary,  when  converted 


62  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

by  a  Catholic,  receives  in  baptism  a  divine  habitual  grace, 
whereby  he  is  enabled  to  believe  in  the  authority  of  the  church, 
from  the  passages  which  I  have  already  cited,  and  which  prove 
the  existence  of  a  church,  and  its  infallibility.  I  defy  Mr.  Pope 
to  produce  passages  half  so  clear  in  support  of  any  single 
doctrine  of  Christianity.  Did  he  produce  any  passage  so  clear 
in  support  of  his  rule  of  faith]  St.  Paul  tells  us  to  avoid  a 
heretic,  as  "being  condemned  by  his  private  judgment."  Proprio 
judicio  condemnatus,  is  the  language  of  the  Latin  Yulgate  ;  and 
it  is  admitted  by  many  learned  Protestants,  to  be  the  best  trans- 
lation of  the  scriptures  extant.  Even  St.  John  tells  us  not  to 
salute  a  heretic,  "  nee  ave  ei  dixeritis."  Will  Mr.  Pope  convince 
any  one  of  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures,  but  on  human 
authority  alone.  Now,  "  faith  comes  from  hearing,  and  hearing 
from  the  words  of  Christ."  Mr.  Pope's  faith  is  therefore 
grounded  on  human  authority,  and  not  on  divine  inspiration. 
The  Socinian  comes  to  Mr.  Pope,  (and  here  I  would  solicit 
your  particular  attention  to  this  point,)  and  says,  I  agree  with 
you  in  your  principle  of  private  judgment — I  agree  with  you  that 
the  scriptures  are  the  inspired  word  of  God  ;  but  you,  Mr.  Pope, 
have  corrupted  the  sense  of  the  scriptures.  You  put  upon  them' 
an  interpretation  which  they  will  not,  cannot  bear.  You  admit 
articles  of  faith  which  are  opposed  to  the  scriptures,  and  contrary 
to  common  sense.  You  hold  in  common  with  me  that  there  is 
no  way  of  judging  or  interpreting  the  sacred  scriptures,  except, 
according  to  private  judgment,  or,  in  other  words,  common 
sense.  Again,  you  say,  that  a  woman  conceived  an  infant 
through  a  supernatural  agency.  Here  also  is  a  romantic  inter- 
pretation, quite  impervious  to  reason  and  to  common  sense. 
Yon  should,  (concludes  the  Socinian,)  you  should  understand 
all  those  texts  in  a  figurative  sense.  Mr.  Pope  will  then  recur 
to  various  passages  of  scripture  to  prove  the  divinity  of  Christ ; 
but  when  he  urges  his  interpretation  against  that  of  the  consistent 
Socinian,  the  latter  will  contend  for  his  equal  right  to  interpret 
them  ;  and  he  will  justly  inquire,  is  no  man  but  Mr.  Pope  to  be 
allowed  to  exercise  the  right  of  private  judgment  1  I  have  as 
good  a  right  to  believe  in  the  existence  of  an  infallible  church, 
and  the  Socinian  as  good  a  right  to  maintain  his  own  interpreta- 
tion, and  reject  all  mysteries,  as  Mr.  Pope  has  to  believe  in  his 
principles.  Wheu  Mr.  Pope  endeavours  to  urge  his  interpreta- 
tion on  the  Socinian  he  abandons  his  own  principles.  Mr.  Pope 
has  no  right  to  blame  any  man  for  having  exercised  his  private 
judgment.  Or  is  that  a  privilege  to  be  exercised  exclusively  by 
the  "saints"  and  the  "  elect?"  Let  Mr.  Pope  get  out  of  the 
predicament  if  he  can.  If  he  can  clear  up  that  difficulty,  he 
will  indeed  be  a  '  Magnus  Apollo.'     Let  him  quit  quibbling 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  83 

about  councils  and  come  directly  to  the  word  of  God — "No 
prophecy  of  scripture  is  made  by  private  interpretation." 
2  Peter,  i,  20.  I  challenge  Mr.  Pope  to  show  how  a  Protestant 
can  make  an  act  of  faith.  But  the  Catholic  who  beheves  in 
the  church  established  by  Christ,  founds  his  faith  upon  the 
authority  of  that  church.  All  difficulties  vanish  before  him, — 
the  atheist  or  the  deist  may  start  several  objections  which  he 
cannot  answer,  but  "  the  church  is  the  solution  of  all  difficulties." 
Mr.  Pope  inquires  how  I  can  get  out  of  the  vicious  circle,  in 
which  he  says  I  am  involved,  by  proving  the  existence  of  the 
church  upon  the  authority  of  the  scriptures,  and  proving  the 
authority  of  the  scriptures  upon  that  of  the  church. 

Mark  my  answer. — I  prove  the  authority  of  the  church  by 
passages  of  scripture,  not  denied  by  Mr.  Pope, — by  passages  of 
scripture  which  are  held  in  common  by  all  Christians.  I 
presume  Mr.  Pope  believes  in  the  four  gospels  :  now  I  appeal 
to  the  four  gospels,  and  to  the  first  epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  Timothy, 
to  prove  that  Jesus  Christ  endowed  his  church  with  the  glorious 
privilege  of  infallibility.  Mr.  Pope  admits  the  four  gospels,  and 
St.  Paul's  epistle  to  be  genuine.  Having  proved  therefore  the 
authority  of  the  church  from  those  books  of  scripture  acknowledged 
by  Mr.  Pope ;  I  then  prove  upon  the  authority  of  that  church 
already  established,  the  inspiration  of  the  other  books  which  are 
not  acknowledged  by  Mr.  Pope.  Where  now,  gentleman,  is  the 
vicious  circle  1  T  have  another  method  of  breaking  this  magical 
ring — of  opening  this  vicious  circle — I  will  reveal  it,  in  the  hope 
that  the  "  circle''^  will  never  be  proposed  as  an  argument  against 
the  Catholic  church  again.  I  take  the  book  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment in  my  hand,  and  for  a  moment,  not  considering  it  to  be 
inspired,!  produce  it  as  a  genuine  and  faithful  historical  relation 
of  the  occurrences  of  the  times  in  which  Jesus  Christ  lived.  I 
learn  from  this  book  that  a  man  appeared  then  upon  earth,  who 
called  himself  the  Son  of  God  :  I  find  it  there  recorded  that  he 
performed  innumerable  miracles  in  the  open  day,  and  in  presence 
of  his  most  inveterate  enemies — that  he  raised  a  man  called 
Lazarus  to  life,  whose  body  was  nearly  rotten  in  the  grave,  and 
that  he  performed  many  other  and  extraordinary  miracles,  "If  I 
had  not  (says  our  Lord,)  done  among  them  the  works  that  no 
other  man  hath  done,  they  would  not  have  sin  in  them." — (John 
XV,  24.)  I  find  from  this  historical  relation  that  Christ  established 
a  church  upon  earth,  to  which  he  made  ample  and  extraordinary 
promises — that  he  would  remain  with  his  church  all  days,  even 
unto  the  consummation  of  the  world — that  he  would  send  the 
Paraclete  to  guide  it  in  the  way — that  he  would  build  it  upon  a 
rock — that  it  would  be  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  truth,  and 
that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  never  prevail  against  it.     I  take 


84  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

this  as  a  mere  history,  and  if  we  are  to  adrri  history,  I  find  it 
there  recorded,  that  Christ  proved  his  mission  by  numerous 
miracles.  I  thus  prove  the  authority  of  the  church  upon  the 
authority  of  Christ" s  miracles  attested  by  the  strongest  historical 
evidence— ^to  wit,  the  historical  evidence  of  the  scriptures,  and 
I  then  prove  that  the  scriptures  are  inspired  upon  the  authority 
of  the  church.  There  is  the  solution  of  what  Mr.  Pope  calls  a 
vicious  circle.  But  I  feel  confident,  that  Mr.  Pope  will  find  it 
rather  a  hard  matter  to  extricate  himself  from  the  circle  in  which 
1  have  him  enclosed. 

Mr.  Pope — Mr.  Maguire  has  not  spoken  of  the  Rev.  Joseph 
Blanco  White  in  the  most  complimentary  terms.  I  beg  to 
assure  Mr.  Maguire,  that  those  who  are  personally  acquainted 
with  Mr.  White,  describe  him  as  a  worthy  and  excellent  man. 
I  could  name  a  gentleman  who  is  not  very  far  distant  from  this 
platform,  a  reformed  priest,  who  has  published  the  nature  of  the 
conversation  which,  he  asserts  from  his  own  knowledge,  is 
interchanged  when  priests  meet  together.  I  shall  not  pollute 
my  lips  by  mentioning  it.  As  to  the  repentance  of  the  people 
of  Nineveh,  I  would  ask,  is  God  satisfied  with  the  external 
expressions  of  sorrow  ?  Does  he  not  say,  "  rend  your  hearts 
and  not  your  garments,  and  turn  to  the  Lord  your  God  ]'* 
With  the  character  of  Henry  the  Eighth  I  have  little  to  do. 
Providence  'tis  true,  employed  him  as  an  instrument,  for  the 
accomplishment  of  important  purposes.  Henry,  indeed,  denied 
the  Pope's  supremacy ;  but  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  he 
died  a  Roman  Catholic  in  principle.  Mr.  Maguire  has  eulogized 
Mr.  O'Caliaghan.  Mr.  O'Callaghan,  I  must  be  allowed  to  say, 
is  not  the  organ  of  Protestant  opinion.  I  grant  that  infidelity 
exists  in  Germany ;  but  I  would  ask,  what  is  the  difference 
between  the  state  of  society  in  that  country  and  in  Spain? 
Infidelity  in  the  latter  country  is  afraid  to  give  utterance  to  its 
opinions  ;  '\a  Germany  it  speaks  out.  Is  it  not  more  honorable 
to  profess  scepticism,  than  to  cloak  beneath  the  garb  of  hy- 
pocrisy an  atheistical  heart  1  I  shall  reserve  my  observations 
on  the  divisions  which  Mr.  Maguire  remarks,  exist  among  Pro- 
testants, till  we  come  to  the  subject  of  unity.  In  proof  that  the 
Bible  is  the  word  of  God,  my  friend  closes  it,  and  appeals  to 
external  evidence — to  the  universal  consent  of  mankind ;  and 
requires  the  individual  to  believe  on  his  testimony,  that  the  univer- 
sal consent  of  mankind  is  in  support  of  the  inspired  records. 
In  order  to  discover  the  universal  consent  of  mankind,  is  the 
pagan,  I  would  ask,  to  read  all  the  histories  that  exist  1  Does 
not  Mr.  Maguire,,  in  truth,  appeal  to  the  private  judgment  »f  th'a 
man?     Does  he  not  adopt  that    node  of  reasoning  which  Le 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  85 

professes  to  condemn  1  Is  it  not  apparent  that  Mr.  Maguire 
will  have  a  much  more  troublesome  task  than  I  shall  have  1  I 
have  not  to  prove  the  infallibihty  of  any  church.  I  let  the  Bible 
speak  for  itself.  Mr.  Maguire  ridicules  the  idea  of  an  internal 
illumination,  and  asks,  how  can  a  man  know  whether  he  pos- 
sesses that  inward  light]     I  answer, 

"  The  fruits  of  the  Spirit  are  charity,  joy,  peace,  patience,  benignity,  goodness, 
love,  amity,  mildness,  faith,  modesty,  continency,  chastity." — Gal.  v,  22,  23. 

Where  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit  are,  there  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells, 

"  If  any  man  will  do  the  will  of  God,  he  shall  know  whether  the  doctrine 
be  of  God  or  not,"  says  the  Saviour. — John,  vii,  17. 

My  friend  asks,  how  can  a  man  make  an  act  of  faith  upou 
human  authority !  I  answer,  T  do  not  make  an  act  of  faith  on 
human  authority,  while  I  maintain  that  Mr.  Maguire  does  so. 
Mr.  Maguire  observes,  that  he  would  first  regard  the  scriptures 
merely  as  an  historical  record  and  that  as  such  they  will  con- 
vince his  judgment  that  his  church  is  infallible.  I  must  be 
allowed  to  assert,  that  in  thus  appealing  to  the  gospels  as  merely 
historical  authority,  and  building  upon  them,  as  such,  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  church  of  Rome,  Mr.  Maguire  acknowledges  that 
her  claim  to  infaUibility  rests  only  upon  human  authority.  So 
that  Mr.  Maguire  makes  an  act  of  faith  in  the  infallibility  of  his 
church  according  to  his  own  views,  merely  upon  human  authority, 
I  am  sure  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Hierarchy  will  be  much 
indebted  to  Mr.  Maguire  for  this  disclosure. 

As  to  grace  being  necessarily  conferred  at  baptism,  it  is  mere 
assertion.  In  proof  of  the  opposite  opinion,  we  have  only  to 
refer  to  the  conduct  of  children.  Do  we  discover  every  child 
who  has  been  baptized,  evincing  the  influence  of  divine  grace  in 
his  temper  and  conduct?  By  no  means.  The  existence  of  the 
immoral  practices  of  which  children  are  guilty,  is  a  direct  refu- 
tation of  Mr.  Maguire's  position,  that  every  child  receives  grace 
at  baptism. 

Mr.  Maguire  says,  that  no  doctrine  is  so  clearly  proved  in 
scripture  as  the  infallibility  of  the  church  of  Rome.  Millions 
are  of  a  contrary  opinion.  Had  God  really  revealed  the  infalli- 
bihty of  the  church  of  Rome,  we  can  scarcely  imagine  but  that 
he  would  have  made  it  known  in  such  broad  and  legible  char- 
acters, that  he  that  runs  might  read  it.  I  should  like  to  know, 
where  the  Pop 6  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible?  'Tis  not  an  act  of 
saving  faith,  to  believe  merely  that  a  book  has  proceeded  frona 
God.  I  exercise  saving  faith,  when  I  exercise  it  upon  the  truths 
of  salvation  contained  in  the  scriptures. 

I  make  an  act  of  faith,  not  on  the  testimony  of  man,  but  on 
the  authority  of  God.     I  believe  the  blessed  truth,  "the  blood 

3 


86  THE    iflVINE    RIGHT 

of  Jesus  Christ  clcanseth  from  all  sin,"  because  I  see  such  im. 
intrinsic  glory  in  the  scheme  ot  redemption,  as  convinces  me 
that  God  is  its  author.  With  respect  to  the  pagan,  I  have 
shown  you,  that  he  can  leceive  the  Bible  as  inspired,  without 
ihe  aid  of  external  evidence — the  sacred  volume  itself  bearing 
witness  of  its  own  divinity,  and  having  the  impress  of  heaven 
stamped  upon  it. 

As  to  the  question  of  the  Socinian,  it  has  been  canvassed  in 
our  letters,  which  are  already  before  the  public.  When,  1 
believe,  that  my  view  of  a  particular  subject  is  correct,  and  that 
of  a  fellow-man  erroneous,  I  surely  do  not  interfere  with  his 
private  judgment,  in  endeavouring  by  argument  to  effect  a 
change  in  his  views.  I  appeal  to  his  judgment,  in  order  to 
convince  him  of  his  error.  I  would  not,  I  could  not  force  his 
judgment ;  but  I  would  endeavour  by  argument  to  carry  con- 
viction to  his  mind.  An  individual,  surely,  may  be  convinced 
of  the  soundness  of  his  opinion  without  laying  claim  to  infalli- 
bility. J  believe,  indeed,  that  the  man  who  holds  not  the  divinity 
of  Christ  is  in  fatal  error.  I  believe,  that,  if  he  continue  under 
its  influence,  he  will  perish ;  and  I  would  use  my  exertions  to 
reclaim  him.  Reason,  we  must  remember,  has  its  legitimate 
province.  A  doctrine  may  be  above  our  reason,  and  not  opposed 
to  it.  God  has  not  revealed  the  modus  of  his  existence  ;  that 
we  are  not  called  upon  to  believe.  He  has  simply  revealed  the 
truth,  that  a  trinity  of  persons  exists  in  the  one  Godhead ;  that 
truth  v/e  are  called  upon  to  believe.  Let  us  bear  in  mind  the 
infinite  distance  between  the  great  Supreme  and  the  narrow 
capacity  of  man.  Shall  we,  poor  w  orms  of  the  earth,  who  know 
out  httle  of  ourselves,  who  are  but  of  yesterday,  shall  we  bring 
to  the  bar  of  our  finite  intellects  the  nature  of  the  infinite  and 
eternal  Godl  Study  the  revelation  which  Deity  has  given  of 
himself,  and  you  will  perceive  that  the  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit 
respectively  sustain,  in  the  great  scheme  of  redemption,  offices 
to  which  none  but  a  divine  person  could  be  adequate. 

How  does  Mr.  Maguire  endeavor  to  convince  the  Socinian  1 
By  the  authority  of  his  church.  "  I  deny  in  toto,"  replies  the 
Socinian  "her  infallibility;  how  can  I  argue  with  you,  who 
refuse  an  appeal  to  common  sense,  to  scripture,  and  to  fact ; 
for  all  these  overthrow  the  supposed  infallibility  of  your  church?" 
On  the  other  hand,  I  entertain  some  hope,  that  arguing  on  the 
principles  of  private  judgment,  I  shall  be  enabled,  under  the 
divine  blessing,  to  convince  the  man  who  will  not  listen  to  Mr. 
Maguire.  I  argue  upon  authority — the  sacred  sciiptures — 
which  the  Socinian  Admits ;  Mr.  Maguire  argues  with  him  on 
ground  ichich  he  will  not  acknowledge — *^'«  infallibjlitj  of  the 
f-burch  of  Rorpe. 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT  87 

Mr.  Maguire  has  asked,  how  couid  an  igiioriint  ProtefetanI 
perform  an  act  of  faith  ?  Blessed  be  God  ;  many  poor  can  do 
so.  God  hath  chosen  not  a  few  individuals  who  are  "  poor  in 
this  world,  to  be  rich  in  faith,  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom."  M». 
Maguire  has  referred  to  a  passage  in  Peter.  It  runs  thus, 
*'  No  prophecy  of  scripture  is  made  by  private  interpretation." 
Douay,  2  Pet.  i,  20,  (tcJta^  emlvaeMg^)  or,  as  it  may  be  trans- 
lated, "  no  prophecy  of  scripture  is  its  own  intrepreter ;"  we 
are  to  intrepret  prophecy  by  the  analogy  of  scripture.  Can  we 
imagine  that  St.  Peter  did  not  wish  those  whom  he  addressed, 
to  give  attention  to  the  scripture,  when  in  the  19th  verse  he 
says,  "  We  have  the.  more  firm  prophetical  word,  whereunto 
you  do  well  to  attend^  as  to  a  light  that  shineth  in  a  dark  place  ?' 
Whom  does  the  Apostle  exhort  1  His  epistle  is  not  addressed 
to  ecclesiastics  exclusively,  but  "to  them  that  have  obtained 
equal  faith  with  us  in  the  justice  of  our  God  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ."  And  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  that  in  the  second  epistle, 
in  which  the  words  that  we  are  considering  stand,  there  is  no 
mention  whatsoever  made  of  any  ecclesiastical  officer. 
In  the  Apocalypse  I  find  the  following  passage, — 
"Blessed  is  he  that  readeth  and  heareth  the  words  oHhis prophecyJ'^ 

Mr.  Maguire  has  referred  to  the  Apocrypha.  It  is  remarkabio 
that  Mr.  Maguire  and  his  church  should,  on  the  canonicity  of 
the  Apocrypha,  be  at  issue  with  those  whose  authority  he  pro- 
fesses to  venerate.  In  the  fourth  century,  we  have  the  cata 
logues  of  Jerome,  secretary  to  pope  Damasits  (in  Praefat  ad  Libr. 
Regum  sive  Prologo  Galeato,)  and 'of  Rufinus,  (Expositio  ad 
Symb.  Apost.)  most  accurately  agreeing  with  the  Protestant 
canon,  and  rejecting  the  Apocrypha. 

Rufinus  writes  as  follows : 

"  This,  then,  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  in  the  Old  Testament  inspired  tlio 
.aw  and  the  prophets,  and  in  the  New  the  gospels  and  the  Apostles.  Where- 
fore  the  Apostle  says,  that  'all  scripture  is  given  hy  inspiration  of  God,  and 
is  profitable  for  doctrine.' — 2  Tim.  iii,  16.  It  will  not,  therefore,  be  improper 
to  enumerate  here  the  books  of  the  New  and  Old  Testament,  which  we  find 
by  the  monuments  of  the  Fatiers  to  have  been  delivered  to  the  churches  as 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  the  first  place, 
are  the  five  books  of  Moses,  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deutero- 
nomy. After  these  are  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun,  and  the  Judges,  together 
with  Ruth.  Next  the  four  books  of  the  kingdoms,  which  the  Hebrews  reckon 
two,  the  book  of  the  Remains,  which  is  called  the  Chronicles,  and  two  books 
of  Ezra,  which  by  them  are  reckoned  one,  and  Esther.  The  prophets  are 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel,  and  besides  one  book  of  the  twelve 
prophets.  Job  also,  and  the  Psalms  of  David.  Solomon  has  left  three  books 
to  the  churches,  the  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  the  Song  of  Songs ;  with 
these  they  conclude  the  number  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Of  the 
New  there  are  the  four  gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John;  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  by  Luke;  fourteen  epistles  of  the  Apostle  Paul ;  two 
epistles  of  the  Apostle  Peter;  one  of  James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord  and 


eO  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

Apostle  ;  one  of  Jude  ;  three  of  John  ;  the  Revelation  of  John.  TKese  are 
the  volumes  which  the  Fathers  have  included  in  the  canon,  and  out  of  which 
they  would  have  us  prove  the  doctrines  of  our  faitli. 

"  However,  it  ought  to  be  observed,  that  there  are  also  other  books  which 
are  not  canonical,  but  have  been  called  by  our  forefathers  ecclesiastical,  as 
the  Wisdom  of  Solomon;  and  another,  which  is  called  the  Wisdom  of  the 
son  of  Sirach,  and  among  the  Latins  is  called  by  the  general  name  yf  Eccle- 
siasticus :  by  which  title  is  denoted,  not  the  author  of  the  book,  but  the  quality 
of  the  writing.  In  the  same  rank  is  the  book  of  Tobit  and  Judith,  and  ti^e 
books  of  thi  Maccabees." — In  Symb.  Apost.  ap.  Cyprian  in  App.  p.  26,  27. 
et  ap.  Hier:m.  t.  v.  p.  141,  142. 

St.  Jerome,  secretary  to  Pope  Damasus,  writes  thus — 

"  The  Hebrews  have  two  and  twenty  letters ;  and  they  have  as  many 
books  of  divine  doctrine  for  the  instruction  of  mankind.  The  first  book  is 
called  by  them  Bereshith,  by  us  Genesis ;  the  second  is  called  Exodut  the 
third  Leviticus ;  the  fourth  Numbers ;  the  fifth  Deuteronomy.  Ti*^*^.  are 
the  five  books  of  Moses,  which  they  call  Thora,  tlie  Law. 

"  The  second  class  contains  the  prophets,  which  they  begin  with  tno  oook 
of  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun.  The  next  is  the  book  of  Judges,  with  which  they 
join  Ruth ;  her  history  happening  in  the  time  of  the  Judges.  The  third  is 
Samuel,  which  we  call  the  first  and  second  book  of  the  kingdoms.  The 
fourth  is  the  book  of  Kings,  or,  the  third  and  fourth  book  of  the  kingdoms,  or 
rather  of  the  Kings ;  for  they  do  not  contain  the  history  of  many  nations,  but 
of  the  people  of  Israel,  only  consisting  of  twelve  tribes.  The  fifth  is  Isaiah; 
the  sixth  Jeremiah  j  the  seventh  Ezekiel  j  the  eighth  the  book  of  the  twelve 
Prophets. 

"  The  third  class  is  that  of  hagiographa,  or  sacred  writings  :  the  first  of 
which  is  Job  ;  the  second  David,  of  which  they  make  one  volume,  called  the 
Psalms,  divided  into  five  parts  ;  the  third  is  Solomon,  of  which  there  are  three 
books;  the  Proverbs,  or  Parables,  as  they  call  them,  the  Ecclesiastes,  and 
the  Song  of  Songs  ;  the  sixth  is  Daniel ;  the  seventh  is  the  Chronicles,  con- 
sisting with  us  of  two  books,  called  the  first  and  second  of  the  Remains;  the 
eighth  is  Ezra,  which  among  the  Greeks  and  Latins  makes  two  books ;  the 
ointh  is  Esther. 

"  Thus  there  are  in  all  two  and  twenty  books  of  the  old  Law  ;  that  is  five 
books  of  Moses,  eight  of  the  Prophets,  and  nine  of  the  Hagiographa.  But 
some  reckon  Ruth  and  the  Lamentations  aniong  the  Hagiographa,  so  there 
will  be  four  and  twenty. 

"  The  prologue  I  write  as  a  preface  to  all  the  books  to  be  translated  by  me 
from  the  Hebrew  into  Latin,  that  we  may  know  that  all  the  books  which  are 
not  of  this  number,  are  to  be  reckoned  apocryphal:  therefore.  Wisdom,  which 
is  commonly  called  Solomon's,  and  the  book  of  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach,  and 
Judith,  and  Tobit,  and  the  Shepherd  are  not  in  the  c^non.  The  first  book 
of  Maccabees,  I  have  fe-md  in  Hebrew  ;  the  second  is  Greek,  as  is  evident 
from  the  style." — In  Prol.  Gal.  sen.  Praefat.  de  Omnib.  Libr.  V.  T.  Tom.  i,  p. 
317 — 322.  ed.  Bened.  "As  therefore,  the  church  readeth  Judith  and  Tobit, 
and  the  books  of  the  Maccabees,  but  does  not  receive  them  among  the  canon- 
ical scriptures ;  so  likewise  it  may  read  these  two  books  (the  book  of  Jesus, 
the  son  of  Sirach,  and  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon)  for  the  edification  of  the 
people,  but  not  as  of  authority  for  proving  any  doctrine  of  rehgion  "— Prce£ 
in  libr.  Salom.  t.  i,  p.  938.  939. 

I  state  upon  the  authority  of  Josephus  and  Bellarmine  that 
the  Jews  never  received  the  Apocrypha. — (Joseph.  Cont.  Apiou, 
I.  i,  c.  8.  ap.  Euseb.  Eccl.  1.  iii,  c.  9,  10. — Bellarm.  Lib.  i,  De 
Verbo  Dei,  c.  10.)  It  is  also  worthy  of  notice,  that  there  are 
coatradictions  in  the  Apocrypha  to  the  canonical  books.     I  am 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  89 

inclined  to  suspect,  that  one  reason  which  induces  the  church 
of  Rome  to  admit  the  Apocrypha,  is,  that  they  contain  n  passage 
or  two  which  savor  of  purgatory.  In  Maccabees  (1.  vi,  16 — 2. 
i,  16.  ix,  28.)  we  are  informed  that  king  Antiochus  died  three 
times  over ! !  In  2  Mace,  xiv,  42,  suicide  is  commended.  The 
author  of  the  second  book  of  Maccabees  concludes  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner  : 

*'  I  also  will  here  make  an  end  of  my  narration  ;  which  if  I  have  done  well, 
and  as  it  becometh  the  history,  it  is  what  I  desired ;  but  if  not  so  perfectly, 
it  must  be  pardoned  me." — xv,  39. 

Does  such  language  intimate  that  the  author  believed  that  he 
had  written  an  inspired  book?  External  and  internal  evidence 
will  prove  that  the  Apocrypha  is  not  canonical.  It  is  a  well 
known  fact,  that  in  the  time  of  Jerome,  the  Roman  church  did 
not  receive  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  canonical,  while  all  the 
churches  in  the  East  received  it. — She  receives  it  now.  Wha 
shall  we  think  of  her  consistency?  St.  Jerome  observes,  that 

"  Although  formerly  all  the  churches  in  the  east  did  receive  the  epistles  tc 
the  Hebrews  as  canonical,  yet  it  was  not  received  as  canonical  in  the  Latin 
(or  Roman)  church." — In  Js.  c.  6.  Et  Ep.  29.  ad.  Evag.  Tom.  iii. 

Jerome  did  not  submit  to  the  judgment  of  the  church  of  Rome. 
He  says, 

"Although  the  Latin  (or  Roman)  church  doth  not  admit  this  epistle  as 
canonical,  we  notwithstanding  do  receive  it." — Ibid. 

My  friend  has  referred  to  the  passage  of  St.  Augustin — 

"  I  would  not  believe  the  gospel  except  the  authority  of  the  Catholic  church 
moved  me  thereto." 

We  are  informed  that  St.  Augustin,  at  the  head  of  a  number 
of  African  bishops,  wrote  letters  to  the  Pope  of  Rome  resisting 
the  claim  of  appeals  made  by  three  Popes. — (Cone.  Afric.  apud. 
Surium.  p.  69.)  We  may  rest  assured,  therefore,  that  in  the 
passage  which  Mr.  Maguire  has  cited,  Augustin  did  not  refer  to 
the  authority  of  the  church  of  Rome,  an  authority  which  he  him- 
self opposed.  Permit  me  to  make  a  few  observations  on  the 
passage  to  which  Mr.  Maguire  has  called  our  attention.  It  is 
probable  that  Augustin  speaks  hypothetically,  not  in  reference 
to  his  then  state  of  mind,  but  as  if  he  was  yet  halting  between 
Manichean  principles,  and  those  of  the  gospel,  using  crederem 
t)ro  credidissem,  commoveret  pro  commovisset,  a  change  of  tense 
not  unusual  with  some  of  the  fathers.  I  beg  to  give  you  the 
views  of  some  eminent  Roman  Catholic  writers  upon  this  pas- 
sage :  some  refer  the  saying  of  Augustin,  not  to  the  present 
church  but  to  the  church  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles.  Thus 
Durandus  de  St.  Sourqain  after  having  quoted  the  words  of 
Augustin,  observes, 

"  This  passage  which  treats  o{  the  approval  of  the  ialpturcs  by  the  church* 

8* 


90  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

applies  solely  to  the  church  in  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  which  was  filled 
with  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  besides  saw  the  miracles  of  Christ,  and  heard  his 
doctrine,  and  on  that  account  was  a  fit  witness  of  the  things  which  Christ 
both  did  and  said."— Durand  in  3  Sent.  Dist.  24,  a.  i,  fol,  169, 

Again,  Gerson,  commenting  on  this  passage  of  Augustin, 
observes  : 

"  By  the  church,  Augustin  means  the  primitive  assemblies  of  those  who 
had  seen  and  heard  Christ,  and  had  been  his  witness." — De  vita  Spirit, 
animar.  Lect  2,  corol.  7,  part  3,  fol.  322. 

The  view  of  the  celebrated  cardinal  De  Aliaco  is  as  follows : 

(In  lib.  Sentent.  art.  iii,  fol.  49,  59.)  After  having  observed  that  "the 
principles  of  theology  are  the  truths  of  the  sacred  canon,  because  from  them 
IS  made  the  ultimate  solution  of  theological  discourse," 

He  remarks,  in  reference  to  this  very  saying  of  St.  Augustin. 

"  It  is  not  proved  by  the  authoHty  of  St.  Augustin,  that  he  believed  in  the 
gospel  by  the  authority  of  the  church  as  a  principle  of  theology,  by  which  it  could 
be  proved  theologically,  that  the  gospel  is  true,  but  only  as  the  first  moving  cause 
which  led  him  to  the  faith  of  the  gospel.  As  if  he  or  any  other  had  said,  I 
would  not  trust  in  the  gospel,  if  the  sanctity  of  the  church,  and  the  miracles 
of  Christ  had  not  moved  me,  in  which  saying,  although  there  be  assigned 
some  reason  for  a  belief  in  the  gospel,  it  is  not  entirely  a  first  principle." 

These  quotations  will  serve,  I  trust,  to  throw  some  light  upon 
the  passage.  I  would  beg  to  remind  my  friend,  that  if  it  were 
not  capable  of  an  easy  and  natural  explanation,  the  Bible,  and 
the  Bible  alone  is  the  religion  of  Protestants.  The  testimony 
of  St.  Augustin  is  of  no  weight  beyond  the  boundaries  of  truth. 
I  have  shown,  however,  that  the  meaning  of  Augustin's  words 
is  different  from  that  which  Mr.  Maguire  ascribes  to  them  ;  and 
the  comment  of  Augustin  himself  on  the  fourth  chapter  of  John 
(Tract  xvi,  23,)  seems  beautifully  to  elucidate  his  meaning  : — 

"  The  woman  first  told  the  Samaritans,  and  they  believed  upon  her  testi- 
mony, and  asked  the  Saviour  to  remain  with  them.  He  remained  two  days, 
and  more  believed.  And  when  they  had  beheved,  they  said  to  the  woman, 
"  We  now  believe,  not  for  thy  saying,  for  we  ourselves  have  heard  him,  and 
know  that  this  is  indeed  the  Saviour  of  the  world,"  first,  by  report,  after- 
wards by  the  presence  of  Christ." — "  Primum  per  famam,  postea  per  prie- 
sentiam." 

Augustin  adds : 

"  So  now  it  happeneth  with  those  who  are  out  of  the  church  and  not  yet 
Christians.  Christ  is  taught  by  Christian  friends,  as  it  were  by  the  woman, 
that  is  by  the  church's  instruction.  They  come  to  Christ  and  believe  by  the 
report ;  and  many  more  and  with  more  confidence  beheve,  that  he  is  the 
Saviour  of  the  world." 

The  mere  testimony  of  man  may  be  the  first  exciting  cause 
of  drawing  the  mind  towards  the  scriptures  ;  but  does  that  testi- 
mony therefore  become  infallible  1  Does  a  man,  who  receives 
the  record  that  God  has  given  concerning  his  Son,  though  his 
attention  may  have  been  first  attracted  to  the  inspired  records  by 
tlie  tf^stimony  of  a  fellow-creature,  exercise  an  act  of  faith  on 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  9^^! 

human  authority  ?  By  no  means.  Were  all  the  churches  and 
all  the  inhabitants  of  the  world  to  assert,  that  a  particular  volume 
was  a  revelation  from  God,  if  that  volume  contained  an  immoral 
code,  palpable  contradictions,  or  statements,  plainly  derogatory 
to  the  character  of  God,  I  could  not  receive  it  as  divine. 

Mr.  Maguire — My  friend  commenced  by  asserting  tha4 
Christ  did  not  pronounce  his  Apostles  infallible,  because  Judas 
betrayed  his  master.  This  fact  only  proves  that  he  did  not  pro- 
mise them  the  quality  of  impeccability,  but  by  no  means  proves 
that  he  did  not  promise  them  infallibility  in  matters  of  faith. 
Though  Judas  betrayed  his  master,  he  did  not  deny  the  faith — 
he  committed  the  sin  for  money,  and  he  supposed  that  his  master 
would  escape  from  his  enemies.  Though  he  betrayed  his  mas- 
ter, he  was  guilty  of  no  breach  of  faith.  I  called  on  Mr.  Pope 
to  show  how  a  Protestant,  literate  or  illiterate,  can  make  an  act  of 
faith  or  of  belief  in  the  divine  inspiration  of  the  sacred  scriptures. 
Mr.  Pope  says  that  the  language  of  the  scriptures  carries  about 
it  internal  evidence  sufficient  to  convince.  Are  those,  to  whom 
he  gives  the  scriptures,  learned  enough  to  discover  this  fact? 
He  talked  of  an  internal  illumination,  and  how  a  person  upon  a 
sudden  comes  upon  the  light  of  the  gospel.  Is  there  a  scholar 
present  who  does  not  feel  that  Mr.  Pope  has  not  approached 
the  difficulty  ?  How  will  the  poor  and  the  illiterate  ascertain 
the  truth  of  scripture  from  the  manner  in  which  they  are  con- 
veyed 1  May  not  the  poor  and  ignorant  man  continue,  as  St. 
Augustin  did  before  his  conversion,  to  laugh  at  the  sacred 
volume  1  But  after  his  conversion,  St.  Augustin  tells  of  the 
veneration  he  paid  to  that  noblest  of  all  works,  the  sacred 
scriptures.  St.  Augustin,  be  it  remembered,  was  converted  by 
the  preaching  and  teaching  of  St.  Ambrose,  and  not  by  reading 
the  Bible.  How  will  the  new  convert  from  Paganism  receive 
the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost?  The  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
is  not  communicated  until  after  baptism  has  been  conferred. 
Look  at  Cornehus  the  centurion.  If  in  his  moral  habits  and 
good  life  he  exhibited  a  portion  of  God's  mercy,  he  did  not 
receive  the  visible  marks  of  the  Holy  Ghost  until  after  his  bap- 
tism. Nor  did  the  Samaritans  exhibit  the  marks  of  that  divine 
grace,  till  they  were  baptized.  It  would  be  more  difficult  to 
bring  home  to  the  conviction  of  a  pagan  the  proofs  of  that 
internal  evidence  of  the  scriptures  of  which  Mr.  Pope  speaks, 
than  the  proofs  of  their  inspiration.  Mr.  Pope  wants  to  prove 
the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures  to  the  pagan,  by  a  thing  which 
is  in  itself  more  difficult  of  proof.  With  regard  to  the  Sociuian, 
how  does  Mr.  Pope  act?  "I  lay  down,"  says  he,  "certain 
texts  of  scripture — they  are  wrongly  interpreted  by  the  Socinian ; 


M  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

but  I  did  not  force  his  judgment."  Mr.  Pope,  thank  God 
cannot  force  the  judgment  of  any  individual ;  but  my  observa- 
tions was,  that  Mr.  Pope  could  not  urge  any  interpretation  at 
all  upon  the  Socinian,  without  violating  the  principle  of  private 
judgment.  The  Socinian  may  retort  on  Mr.  Pope,  and  tell 
him  that  his  interpretation  of  the  scriptures  is  false.  The  Soci- 
nian may  say,  "  I  exercise  my  reason,  and  you  surely  will  not 
find  fault  with  me  for  doing  so.  The  position  that  three  make 
one,  and  one  makes  three,  is  perfectly  above  human  cornprehen- 
sioti.  Do  you  require  me  to  admit  things  which  are  quitt 
inconceivable  ?  You  do  not,  of  course,  desire  that  I  should 
abandon  my  reason,  and  as  to  internal  evidence  1 — it  is  a  thing 
neither  known  to  you,  nor  to  any  one  else."  Such  would  be 
the  answer  of  the  Socinian  to  Mr.  Pope.  I,  on  the  other  hand, 
might  not  be  able  to  convert  the  Socinian,  but  he  could  not  say 
that  I  contradicted  myself.  I  would  deny  to  the  Socinian  the 
right  to  interpret  the  scriptures  by  private  judgment.  That 
would  be  leaving  the  word  of  God  dependent  on  the  whim  and 
caprice  of  every  individual.  The  word  of  God,  I  maintain, 
depends  for  its  interpretation  on  the  church — that  church  which 
is  the  collection  of  the  churches  of  the  same  communion,  scat- 
tered through  the  world — that  church  over  which  Christ  appointed 
St.  Peter  to  preside,  giving  to  him  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  promising  that  whatever  he  loosed  on  earth,  should  be 
loosed  in  heaven,  and  whatever  he  bound  on  earth,  should  be 
bound  in  heaven.  Have  all  those  churches  conspired  through- 
out all  ages  to  give  a  wrong  interpretation  to  the  scriptures  ? 
or  have  they  conspired  to  give  a  false  meaning  to  any  particular 
text  ?  See  the  unanimous  consent  of  different  and  distant 
nations  on  the  subject.  Is  not  that  unanimous  agreement,  a 
better  proof  of  the  truth  of  the  interpretation,  and  of  its  having 
descended  from  the  Jlpostles,  than  the  varying  and  capricious 
judgment  of  each  individuaH  Mr.  Pope  does  not  say  that  he 
is  infallible,  yet  he  endeavours  with  all  the  presumption  of  infal- 
libility to  force  his  interpretation  of  the  scriptures  on  the  Soci- 
nian. Compare  Mr.  Pope's  interpretation  with  the  agreement 
of  all  nations — with  that  ^ucd  universa  tenet  ecclesia.  Here  are 
many  churches  and  different  nations  all  agreeing  in  a  particular 
interpretation  and  specified  articles  of  faith,  for  eighteen  hundred 
years.  Are  not  their  opinions  more  worthy  of  adoption,  than 
the  whims  and  follies  of  individuals  ?  My  friend  has  quoted 
some  of  the  holy  Fathers — I  would  advise  him  to  act  as  Luther 
did,  and  throw  them  overboard.  The  Fathers,  he  will  find,  are 
quite  against  him.  I  could  quote  thirty  different  Fathers,  who 
strongly  condemn  the  exercise  of  private  judgment.  St.  Au* 
gustin,  in  his  book  Contra  Faustum  11,  tome  vi,  p.  183,  says 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  93 

"These,  so  many  and  so  great  ties  bind  the  believing  man  to  the  Catholic 
church.  The  consent  of  nations;  the  regular  succession  of  bishops  from 
Peter,  to  whom  Christ  committed  the  care  of  his  sheep,  down  to  the  present 
bishop  of  Rome ;  lasth',  the  name  of  Catholic  itself  But  unless  the  aiithoritv 
of  this  church  induced  me  to  it,  I  would  not  believe  the  Gospel.  As  thenl 
obey  those  who  say  to  me,  '  Believe  the  Gospel ;'  so  why  should  I  not  obey 
them  when  they  say  to  me,  'Believe  not  the  Manichgeans.'  " 

"  This  church,  moreover,  the  divine  authority  commends,  and  as  it  cannot 
deceive  usj  he  who  fears  to  be  imposed  on  will  consult  the  church,  which 
without  any  ambiguity,  the  scriptures  establish." — Contra  Cresconium  Lib. 
i,  tom.  7,  p.  168. 

And  again — "Do  thou  run  to  the  tabernacle  of  God,  hold  fast  to  the 
Catholic  church ;  do  not  depart  from  that  rule  of  truth,  and  thou  shalt  be 
protected  in  the  tabernacle  from  the  contradiction  of  tongues." — Ennarratio 
tertia  in  psalmum  30,  tom.  viii,  p.  74. 

I  quote  from  genuine  editions  of  the  Fathers.  I  do  not 
advance  corrupted  passages.  Let  Mr.  Pope  show  me  in  a 
genuine  edition  any  passage  in  which  St.  Augustin  refused  to 
hold  communion  with  the  church  of  Rome.  Mr.  Pope,  in  urging 
his  interpretation  of  the  scriptures  upon  the  Socinian,  would 
never  succeed.  The  Socinian  would  say,  '*  I  have  as  good  a 
right  as  you,  Mr.  Pope,  to  the  exercise  of  my  private  judgment, 
and  reason  is  on  my  side."  I  might  not  be  more  felicitious  in 
my  attempts  to  convert  the  Socinian.  I  would  not,  however, 
contradict  my  own  principles.  I  would  refer  him  to  the  consent 
of  mankind  through  many  ages.  I  would  shame  him,  if  he  were 
it  reasonable  man,  into  conviction.  I  would  take  the  Socinian 
by  the  throat — Mr.  Pope  could  not  even  take  him  by  the  heels. 
Has  Mr.  Pope  explained  how  it  happens  that  Protestants  must 
remain  in  many  instances  actual  infidels,  for  several  years  after 
they  have  arrived  at  the  age  of  discretion.  The  Protestant  child 
cannot  receive  the  Bible  on  the  authority  of  Mr.  Pope.  When 
he  opens  the  sacred  volume,  he  finds  passages  in  it  which  may 
make  him  believe  it  not  to  be  the  work  of  God.  There  are 
more  passages  to  be  found  in  it  of  that  description,  than  Mr. 
Pope  could  point  out  in  what  he  considers  the  Apocrypha.  But 
I  hold  the  book  in  which  they  are  found  to  be  of  divine  inspira- 
tion ;  and  if  I  cannot  understand  them,  I  resign  my  judgment  to 
the  church.  But  the  Protestant  child  must  remain  an  infidel. 
For  to  doubt  of  Christif  nity,  is  absolute  infidelity.  ^The  Roman 
Catholic  child,  when  baptized,  receives  the  aid  of  the  Holy 
(jrhost.  He  promises  at  baptism  to  obey  the  church ;  and  1 
proved  the  object  of  his  obedience  entitled  to  it.  But  the  illu- 
mination of  which  Mr.  Pope  speaks,  never  can  be  proved.  It  is 
adapted  only  to  sublimated  imaginations.  It  is  unfortunate  that 
Mr.  Pope  appeals  to  the  Bible  to  decide  our  controversy — for 
Ihe  Bible  is  a  dumb  judge.     Our  Lord  says  to  his  apostles — 

"Go  ye  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations;  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.     Teaching  them  to 


04  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

observe  ail  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you ;  and  behold  I  am  with 
you  all  da>s,  even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world." — Matt,  xxviii,  19,  20. 

Again — "Go  ye  into  the  whole  world  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every 
creature.  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved  j  but  he  that 
believeth  not,  shall  be  condemned." — Mark  xvi,  15,  16. 

Here  our  Lord  plainly  tells  us,  that  he  who  receives  th^ir 
preaching,  when  baptized  shall  be  saved.  Where  is  the  object 
of  Mr.  Pope's  faith?  He  cannot  make  the  mere  book  the 
object  of  his  faith.  He  cannot  invest  the  translators  with 
infallibility.  He  will  not  surely  give  that  title  to  Beza,  and 
others.  Every  thing  in  the  Protestant  church,  and  in  Mr.  Pope's 
lay  church,  is  fallible.  How  can  an  immoveable  structure  be 
raised  upon  a  moveable  foundation  ?  Mr.  Pope  illustrated  one 
of  his  arguments,  by  placmg  one  book  on  the  top  of  another. 
The  illustration  may  be  appropriately  and  happily  applied  in  this 
instance.  Here  are  two  books,  which  we  shall  suppose  to 
represent  the  scriptures  and  private  judgment.  The  Protestant 
child  must  read  the  scriptures  upon  the  authority  of  private 
judgment,  and  vice  versa,  he  must  sustain  private  judgment  upon 
the  scriptures.  He  must  capsize  one  to  support  the  other.  If 
the  Protestant  church  be  liable  to  error,  how  can  any  man  confide 
his  faith  in  it?  And  even  if  the  church  be  supposed  fallible, 
would  it  not  be  cruel  to  deprive  the  poor  and  ignorant  of  their 
only  guide,  they  themselves  being  unable  to  investigate.  Bui 
the  Catholic  church  being  infallibk',  the  Catholic  rests  his  faith 
with  security  on  its  authority.  The  consent  of  mankind  for 
many  ages  is  in  support  of  the  Catholic  church.  A  single 
witness  may  be  suborned,  but  millions  cannot  be  bribed.  I 
propose  the  following  syllogistic  argument  to  Mr.  Pope,  in 
reference  to  his  faith.  That  faith  cannot  be  divine  which  is 
founded  upon  human  authority — now  his  faith  is  founded  upoii 
human  authority,  therefore  it  cannot  be  divine.  There  is  a 
wonderful  coincidence  between  the  opinion  of  Luther,  and  the 
opinion  of  Mr.  Pope,  respecting  the  Apostles.  They  want  to 
do  away  with  the  infallibility  of  the  Apostles,  and  they  confound 
impeccability  with  infallibility.  Luther,  in  a  German  work, 
which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  and  in  another  translated  into  Latin 
by  Jonas  Justus,  at  Luther's  own  request,  speaking  of  the 
Apostles  and  Fathers,  says — "  The  Apostles  were  great  sinners, 
ignorant  men,  and  precious  rogues,"  or  in  the  original.  "  Die 
Apostel  seynd  auck  grosse  Siinder  geweszt,  unde  gute,  grobe, 
grosse  schaelck."  He  says,  "  Even  Paul  himself  was  not  so 
sure  of  his  doctrine,  and  often  doubted,  whether  he  preached  the 
truth  or  not."  "  St.  Jerome  was  a  heretic" — "  St.  Chrysostom 
was  a  prattler,"  and  ridiculing  the  intercession  of  saints,  le 
dares  to  blaspheme  his  God :  "  I  beseech  you,  oh  I  my  deaf 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  95 

little  devil,  that  you  intercede  with  God  for  me  ;  my  dear  little 
devil,  pray  to  God  for  me." 

I  now  call  on  Mr.  Pope  to  make  the  Bible  speak,  and  thus 
decide  the  difference  between  us.  If  he  does  not  do  so,  accord-, 
ing  to  his  principles,  Christ  has  appointed  a  dumb  judge  to 
decide  upon  all  differences  between  man  and  man.  But  our 
Saviour  knew  human  nature  too  well  to  leave  every  individual  to 
follow  his  own  whim  and  caprice.  If  man  be  thus  sent  adrift 
without  any  certain  guide  to  direct  him  in  the  way  of  salvation, 
it  would  be  rather  hard  that  he  should  be  called  to  an  account 
on  the  last  day.  I  ask  if  Mr.  Pope  had  an  estate  at  stake, 
would  he  not  employ  a  lawyer  to  direct  him  in  his  difficulties, 
would  he  not,  instead  of  exercising  his  own  private  judgment  on 
the  Act  of  Parliament,  leave  it  to  the  interpretation  and  decision 
of  his  legal  adviser?  He  wisely  relinquishes  his  private  judg- 
ment and  he  saves  his  estate  ;  what  does  St.  Paul  mean  when 
he  speaks  of  "  captivating  every  understanding?" — 2  Cor.  x,  5. 
Innumerable  are  the  evils  which  result  from  depriving  the  lower 
orders  of  that  authority  upon  which  alone  their  faith  can  be 
founded]  Mr.  Pope  says  that  the  declarations  of  Christ  are 
obvious  and  plain.  I.  wish  to  know  by  what  means  the  Pro- 
testant can  ascertain  that  they  are  the  declarations  of  Christ,  Let 
Mr.  Pope  quit  the  foolish  doctrine  of  internal  illumination. 
Arius  appealed  to  internal  illumination — so  did  all  the  heretics — 
so  did,  in  latter  times,  the  celebrated  Johanna  Southcote ;  she 
announced  herself  as  pregnant  of  the  Messiah,  and  a  whole 
swarm  of  English  parsons  were  among  her  followers  and  be- 
lievers !  This  doctrine,  which  Mr.  Pope  advocates,  tends  to 
the  utter  destruction  of  civil  society  and  ecclesiastical  regime. 
I  would  rather  endure  the  despotism  of  a  Ferdinand,  than  admit 
a  principle  so  contradictory  to  common  sense — a  principle  so 
well  calculated  to  rend  asunder  the  ties  which  unite  man  to  man, 
and  to  disolve  the  social  system  altogether. 

Mr.  Pope. — My  opponent,  I  must  be  allowed  to  observe,  has 
substituted  assertion  for  argument.  He  has  said,  that  it  is  more 
difficult  to  prove  the  internal  evidence  of  the  scriptures,  than 
their  inspiration.  I  brought  forward  the  internal  evidence  in 
proof  of  their  inspiration.  •  Mr.  Maguire  has  asserted  that  a  man 
must  be  baptized  before  he  can  receive  the  Holy  Ghost.  In 
the  8th  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  we  read  that  Philip 
before  he  acceded  to  the  wish  of  the  Ethiopian  eunuch,  who 
requested  to  be  baptized,  said,  ^  If  thou  beUevest  with  all  thy 
heart,  thou  mayest;"  the  eunuch  answered,  "I  believe  that 
Jesuf  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God."  A  man  cannot  exercise  an 
act  o^  fiith.  before  he  receives  the  Holy  Ghost ;  for  "  no  mac 


96  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

can  say  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  but  by  the  Holy  Ghost." 
eunuch,  therefore,  must  have  been  under  the  influence  of 
Holy  Spirit,  when  he  made  this  act  of  faith.  After  he  had  madt 
it,  "  they  went  down  to  the  water,  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch, 
and  he  baptized  him."  He  says,  that  it  is  contrary  to  my  system 
to  urge  any  meaning  of  scripture  against  the  conviction  of  the 
Socinian,  as  it  would  interfere  with  the  exercise  of  his  private 
judgment.  I  have  already  noticed  his  sophism,  but  the  obser- 
vation may  truly  be  returned  upon  Mr.  Maguire.  Does  not  the 
church  of  Rome  act  in  contradiction  to  her  principles,  when 
arguing  with  the  Socinian  1  JVIust  she  not  allow  him  to  exercise 
his  judgment  upon  the  proofs  which  she  brings  forward  in  support 
of  her  claim  to  infallibility  1  My  friend  observes,  that  no  man 
can  force  the  judgment  of  another.  I  am  convinced  of  the  truth 
of  the  remark.  But  the  church  of  Rome  endeavours  to  force 
the  judgment,  and  calls  on  men  to  act  inconsistent  with  their 
reason?  He  says  that  I  am  opposed  to  the  whole  world.  I 
stand  here  as  an  advocate  of  the  great  principles  which  genuine 
Protestants  maintain  in  common,  and  as  a  protester  against  the 
errors  to  which  they  are  in  common  opposed.  Athanasius 
declared  himself  to  be  alone  against  the  whole  world,  when 
Pope  Liberius  signed  the  Arian  creed,  and  the  condemnation 
of  Athanasius. — (Dupin.  Eccl.  Hist.  2  vol.  p.  62,  1697,  Lond. 
— Baron,  tom.  1,  939,  ad  ann.  357,  No.  46,  Mayence  1601.) 
My  friend  has  stated  that  I  brought  forward  corrupted  passages 
of  the  fathers.  Was  it  honorable  in  him  to  make  such  an  asser- 
tion, particularly,  when  he  will  have  an  opportunity  of  cc»nsulting 
the  quotations  1  I  beg  to  say,  that  I  have  examined  in  the 
original  with  some  care  the  passage  from  Augustin  upon  which 
my  friend  has  so  long  dwelt ;  and  I  find  that  Augustin  makes 
use  of  the  expression  "  Catholicis  laudantihus  evangelium"  com- 
mending the  gospel — "  vituperantibus  ManichsBum" — expres 
sions  which  throw  considerable  light  upon  the  passage.  My 
learned  opponent  has  asserted,  that  the  Socinian  never  could 
be  converted  on  my  principles.  The  fact  is  otherwise  ;  for 
Socinians  have  been  converted  by  the  advocates  of  private 
judgment.  My  friend  has  again  repeated  the  position,  that  the 
children  of  Protestants  must  remain  atheists  until  they  arrive  al 
the  years  of  discretion.  I  beg  altogether  to  deny  the  truth  of  the 
assertion.  Much,  I  admit,  devolves  on  parents  and  pastors. 
Their  authority  I  recognize ;  but  authority  is  one  thing 
INFALLIBILITY  ANOTHER.  Is  uot  a  Romau  Catholic  child 
precisely  in  the  same  circumstances  1  I  must  be  permitted  tc 
deny,  that  children  always  receive  grace  in  baptism,  and  appea) 
to  scripture  in  support  of  my  opinion.  How  does  the  Roiv.ab 
ratholic  child  receive  the  doctrnes  of  his  church,  if  not  upon  tht 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  97 

statement  of  the  parent  or  the  priest,  a  child  being  quite  incapable 
of  exercising  its  reason  on  the  proofs  of  the  infallibility  oi'  the 
church  of  Rome?  In  first  of  Corinthians,  12th  chapter,  there 
is  a  beautiful  comparison.  An  analogy  is  there  drawn  between 
the  church  and  the  human  body.  The  members  of  the  human 
frame  contribute  mutually  to  each  other's  well-being : — 

"  The  eye  cannot  say  to  the  hand,  I  need  not  thy  help ;  nor  again  the  head 
to  the  feet,  I  have  tio  need  of  you.  Yea,  much  more,  those  that  seem  to  be 
the  more  feeble  members  of  the  body,  are  necessary;  and  such  as  we  think 
to  be  the  less  honorable  members  of  the  body,  about  these  we  put  more 
abundant  honour;  and  those  that  are  our  uncomely  parts,  have  abundant 
comehneSs.  But  our  comely  parts  have  no  need ;  but  God  hath  tempered 
tiie  body  together,  giving  to  that  which  wanted  the  more  abundant  honour ; 
that  there  might  be  no  schism  in  the  body,  but  the  members  might  be  mutually 
careful  one  for  another.  And  if  one  member  suffer  any  thing,  all  the  members 
suffer  with  it;  or  if  one  member  glory,  all  the  members  rejoice  with  it." — v. 
21—26. 

The  poor  believer,  who  is  acquainted  with  a  person  of  judg- 
jient  and  piety,  may  derive  useful  information  from  him  ;  may 
receive  his  testimony  ;  but  in  doing  so,  he  does  not  acknowledge 
his  infallibility.  Thus,  each  member  of  ihe  church  of  Christ, 
contributes  to  the  edification  of  the  whole  body ;  but  I  deny  that 
any  part  or  the  whole  is  infallible. 

Mr.  Maguire  insinuates  that  a  man  cannot  know  whether  he 
is  enhghtened  by  the  Holy  Spirit.     The  Apostle  says, 

"If  any  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his. — Rom.  viii,  9, 
Again,  "  Try  your  ownselves,  if  ye  be  in  the  faith :  prove  ye  yourselves : 

know  you  not  your  ownselves,  that  Ciirist  Jesus  is  in  you,  unless  perhaps 

you  be  reprobates? — 2  Cor.  xiii,  5. 

Would  the  Apostle  use  such  language,  if  it  were  not  possible 
lo  discover  whether  we  are  influenced  by  the  grace  of  God  ? 

My  friend  has  reminded  us,  that  "  Faith  cometh  byhearing, 
and  hearing  by  the  word  of  God."  It  is  true  that  the  reading 
of  tha  scripture  is  not  the  only  mean  by  which  faith  cometh,  as 
history  and  experience  testify.  The  kingdom  of  God  is  promoted 
by  preaching  also  ;  but  preaching  must  he  found  to  accord  ivlih 
the  word  of  God, — otherwise  there  can  be  no  saving  faith  produced. 
It  is  the  first  time  I  heard  that  Beza  was  a  translator  of  the  Bible 
in  the  time  of  James  I. 

Mr.  Maguire,  as  occasion  requires,  asserts,  that  the  Bible 
supports  the  church,  and  vice  versa,  that  the  church  the  Bible. 
There  is  no  departure  from  my  principles  in  first  exercising  my 
judgment  on  the  proofs  of  revelation,  and  subseqently  appealing 
to  revelation  in  confirmation  of  the  right  of  private  judgment. 

Mr.  Maguire  says,  that  it  would  be  a  pity  to  deprive  the  poor 
man  of  his  belief,  that  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God,  by  telling 
him  that  his  church  is  not  infallible.  I  ask,  are  poor  Protes- 
tants, who  deny  the  infallibility  of  the  church  of  Rome,  as  unac- 

9 


98  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

quainted  with  the  contents  of  the  revelation  as  the  poor  be  -^ging 
to  the  church  of  Rome ;  or  do  they  doubt  the  genuine«<  9S,  and 
authenticity,  and  inspiration  of  the  scriptures  ?  Let  exptjrience 
and  fact  testify  and  answer  these  questions. 

Faith,  we  are  again  told,  cannot  be  divine,  if  it  rests  upon  the 
testimony  of  man.  On  my  principles,  ray  faith  rests  not  upon 
the  testimony  of  man,  but  of  God.  Truth  is  revealed  by  God 
in  the  sacred  volume,  and  I  exercise  faith  upon  that  truth.  My 
friend,  on  the  contrary,  would  have  us  to  exercise  an  act  of 
faith  in  the  inftj^bility  of  the  church  of  Rome  upon  the  authority 
of  the  scriptures,  regarded  merely  as  an  historical  narrative. 

Mr.  Maguire's  quotations  from  Luther  are  probably  of  a 
similar  description  with  the  extract  which  a  Roman  Catholic 
Priest  lately  gave  in  a  sermon,  from  the  table-talk  of  Luther, 
that  "  Moses  was  a  hangman."  The  German  word,  in  more 
polished  phraseology,  signifies  an  "  executioner ;"  and  it  is 
plain  from  the  context,  that  by  the  word  "  Moses,"  Luther 
intended  to  designate  the  JYIoral  Laiv,  which  acts  as  an  execu- 
tioner to  those  who  seek  to  he  justified  by  their  obedience  to  its 
demands. 

What  was  the  conduct  of  the  Apostles'?  Did  they  domineer 
over  the  faith  of  the  primitive  Christians  ? 

"  Not  for  that,  says  the  Apostle  Paul,  we  have  dominion  over  your  faith, 
but  are  helpers  of  your  joy." — 2  Cor.  i,  23. 

When  the  Bereans  contrasted  with  the  scriptures  the  preach- 
ing even  of  an  *B.postle,  are  they  condemned  for  not  having 
implicitly  received  his  testimony]  No,  St.  Luke,  in  the  seventh 
chapter  of  Acts,  and  eleventh  verse,  writes, 

"  Tliose  were  more  noble  than  those  of  Thessalonica,  in  that  they  received 
the  word  with  all  eagerness,  daily  searching  the  scriptures  whether  these  things 
were  so" 

Here  we  find  the  Bereans  exercising  their  judgments  on  the 
Old  Testament,  in  reference  to  the  preaching  of  an  inspired 
Apostle ;  and  not  only  is  there  no  censure  passed  upon  them, 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  a  high  eulogium  pronounced  upon  their 
conduct.  My  friend  has  quoted  the  passage — **  If  an  angel 
from  heaven  preach  any  other  Gospel  unto  you  than  that  which 
you  have  received,  let  him  be  accursed."  Gal.  i,  8,  9.  Is 
not  this  a  direct  appeal  to  us  to  exercise  our  judgment  upon  the 
doctrines  of  a  preacher,  even  though  he  should  descend  firom 
heaven,  irradiated  with  all  the  brightness  of  angelic  glory?  My 
friend's  analogy  between  an  appeal  to  the  church  of  Rome  and 
to  Judges,  to  Parliament  and  to  the  house  of  Lords,  falls  to  the 
ground  ;  for  neither  Judges,  nor  Parliament,  nor  house  of  Lords 
are  infallible.  Judges  can  only  take  cognizance  of  the  outward 
act,  but  the  church  of  Rome  would  extend  its  contro'  pver  tlw 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  99 

mind  and  conscience.  Judges  must  not  be  paities  in  the  causes 
which  come  before  them,  lest  they  should  be  biased  by  interest. 
But  the  Pope,  and  his  undefined  church  are  a  party  in  the  hon- 
ours and  emoluments  which  result  from  their  claim  of  infallibility. 
We  perceive,  therefore,  that  there  exists  no  analogy.  Mr,  Ma* 
guire  has  'quoted,  as  if  from  scripture,  the  words,  "  captivating 
the  understanding."  I  do  not  remember  such  a  text.  My 
friend  has  stated,  that  the  principle  of  private  judgment  has  led 
to  the  deposing  of  monarchs.  I  have  before  remarked,  that  the 
principle  should  be  exercised  in  accordance  w'dh  sound  sense. 
On  the  other  hand,  I  shall  prove  that  Popes  considered  them- 
selves justified  in  deposing  sovereigns.  I  would  ask,  was  it  the 
right  of  private  judgment,  or  the  pretension  of  infallibility,  which 
led  Gregory  Vll,  to  depose  Henry,  Emperor  of  Germany] 
Gregory's  decree  runs  thus — 

"  On  the  part  of  the  Omnipotent  God,  I  forbid  Henry  to  govern  the  king- 
doms of  Germany  and  Italy.  I  absolve  all  his  subjects  from  every  oath  which 
they  have  taken  or  may  take  to  him ;  and  I  excommunicate  every  person 
who  shall  serve  him  as  king. — (Lib.  v,  Ep.  24.) 

Gregory  IX,  made  the  following  announcement  in  the  thirteenth 
century — 

"Be  it  known  to  all,  who  are  under  the  dominion  of  heretics,  that  they  are 
set  free  from  every  tie  of  fidelity  or  duty  to  them ;  all  oaths,  and  solemn 
engagements  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding." — (Lib.  v,  Tit.  7.) 

The  Maynooth  Class-book  informs  us,  that — 

"  The  Pope  passed  sentence  against  the  Emperor  Frederick  upon  a  charge 
of  having  violated  a  treaty  of  peace,  and  also  upon  a  vehement  suspicion  of 
netiisy.  The  words  of  the  sentence  were  these : — 'Inasmuch  as  we,  though 
unworthy,  do  stand  in  the  place  of  Jesus  Christ  on  earth,  and  to  us  it  was  said, 
in  the  person  of  the  Apostle  Peter,  whatsoever  thou  bindest  on  earth  shall  be 
bound  in  heaven,'  we  having  previously  used  diligent  deliberation  with  our 
brethren  and  the  holy  council  (the  council  of  Lyons,  received  as  general  at 
Maynooth)  concerning  the  above,  and  many  other  nefarious  excesses,  do 
declare  the  aforesaid  prince  to  be  bound  in  his  sins,  to  be  a  cast-away,  and 
deprived  of  all  honour  and  dignity ;  we  denounce  him,  and  deprive  him  by  this 
sentence,  absolving  his  subjects  from  their  oaths  of  fidelity,  and  by  our  apos- 
tolical authority,  strictly  enjoining,  that  no  one  shall  hereafter  obey  him  as 
emperor  or  king." 

Here  are  examples  of  the  head  of  the  church,  by  the  exercise 
of  his  authority,  deposing  kings ;  and  in  one  of  the  instances 
adduced,  asserting  that  the  proceeding  was  sanctioned  by  a 
general  council. 

On  the  other  hand,  I  assert,  that  whenever  an  individual  in 
the  exercise  of  his  judgment  has  co-operated  in  deposing  a 
sovereign,  he  has  abused  the  faculty.  1  argue  not  for  the 
abuses  of  private  judgment.  If  I  find  the  exercise  of  private 
judgment  to  accord  with  the  voice  of  the  God  of  Nature  and 
of  Revelationi  T  maintain  that  the  charges  c  f  my  opponent  are 


106  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

levelled  not  against  me,  but  against  the  Lord  of  Lords  and  King 
of  Kings.  Is  it  logical  to  argue  from  the  abuse  of  a  thing 
against  its  use  ?  Every  blessing  may  be  perverted.  Learning, 
health,  and  liberty,  may  be  abused  ;  but  are  we,  therefore,  to 
prefer  the  iron  grasp  of  tyranny  to  the  sweets  of  freedom  ;  and 
are  ignorance  and  debility  to  be  substituted  in  the  room  of 
science  and  of  health?  One  word  more — the  doctrine  of  infal- 
libility militates  against  the  promises  of  divine  wisdom  made  to 
them  that  seek  it.     The  Psalmist  says  : 

"  Open  thou  mine  eyes  that  I  may  behold  wondrous  things  out  of  thy 
law."-7-cxix  Ps.  18. 

"  Thy  word  is  a  lamp  to  my  feet,  and  a  light  to  my  paths." — cxix  Ps.  105. 

"If  ye  then  being  evil,"  says  the  Saviour,  "  know  how  to  give  good  gifts 
unto  your  children,  how  much  more  will  your  heavenly  Father  give  his  Holy 
Spirit  to  them  that  ask  him." — Luke,  xi,  13. 

"  If  any  man  lack  wisdom,"  says  St.  James,  "  let  him  ask  of  God,  who 
giveth  to  all  men  hberally,  and  upbraideth  not,  and  it  shall  be  given  unto 
him."— i,  5. 

If  I  am  to  bow  implicitly  to  the  dictates  of  the  church  of 
Rome,  why  do  I  want  wisdom  ?  Why  should  I  exercise  my 
judgment  by  "  proving  all  things  and  holding  fast  that  which  is 
good  ?"  Monstrous  contradiction  !  In  truth  the  very  fact  that 
God  has  vouchsafed  to  us  a  revelation  of  his  will  and  character, 
evidently  implies,  that  man  should  exercise  his  judgment  upon 
its  contents.  I  would  say  in  conclusion,  therefore,  let  us  ally 
clergy  as  well  as  laity,  vindicate  the  right  of  private  judgment. 
The  priests,  as  well  as  the  laics,  must  answer  at  the  bar  of 
judgment.  They  cannot  give  account  for  us.  Wo  to  those  who 
follow  the  direction  of  ecclesiastics  implicitly.     It  is  written, 

"The  blind  and  the  leaders  of  the  Wind  shall  both  fall  into  the  ditch." 

I  fear  that  quotations  from  the  Fathers  are  calculated  rather  to 
weaken  the  impression,  which  I  trust  has  been  made  upon  youi 
conscience.  As,  however,  a  few  minutes  remain,  I  shall  occupy 
them  by  reading  you  a  few  extracts.     St.  Augustin  says,  that 

"  The  manner  of  expression  in  which  the  holy  scripture  is  framed,  altliough 
it  is  to  be  penetrated  but  by  few,  is  accessible  to  all.  Those  plain  things 
which  it  contains,  it  speaks  to  the  heart  of  the  unlearned  and  learned,  hke  a 
familiar  friend,  without  disguise.  That  mind  which  is  inimical  to  this  doc- 
trine, is  either  erroneously  ignorant  that  it  is  most  wholesome  or  loathes  the 
medicine  from  disease." — Epist.  137  ad  Volusianum. 

Again,  "  God  has  bowed  the  scriptures  even  to  the  capacity  of  babes  and 
rick  lings,  as  he  hath  in  another  Psalm,  he  bowed  the  heavens  and  came 
down." 

For  the  exposition  of  passages  which  cannot  be  explained  by 
Q  comparison  with  other  parts  of  the  sacred  volume,  Augustin's 
rule  is,  not  to  consult  an  infallible  church,  but 

"Let  every  one  interpret  according  to  his  own  sense," 
"Prout  quisque  voluerit."—  Lib.  de  unit  Ecc.  c.  16. 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  101 

St.  Chrysostom  says, 

"  All  necessary  things  are  manifest." — Hmn.  in  2  Thes.  2. 

St.  Basil  says, 

"The  hearers  that  are  instructed  in  the  scriptures  must  examine  the  doo- 
^.rines  of  their  teachers ;  they  must  receive  those  things  which  are  agreeable 
lo  scripture,  and  reject  what  are  contrary  to  it." — In  Mordium  Regula  72, 
in  initio, 

Mr.  Maguire — This,  perhaps,  is  the  most  important  half 
hour  of  the  discussion.  It  remains  for  this  assembly  to  say 
whether  Mr.  Pope  has  at  all  attempted  to  get  out  of  the  diffi- 
culty— to  wit,  how  a  Protestant  child  could  make  an  act  of  faith 
upon  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures.  AH  Mr.  Pope's  argu- 
ments went  to  show  that  the  scriptures  are  the  word  of  God.  Is 
there  an  individual  present  who  does  not  entertain  a  similar 
opinion  ?  That  belief  is  a  common  principle  between  us.  I 
only  want  to  show  that  the  Protestant  child  cannot  know  the 
scriptures  to  be  the  word  of  God,  by  the  rule  which  Mr.  Pope 
endeavours  to  establish. — Mr.  Pope  places  the  child  under  cir- 
cumstances which  render  it  impossible  for  him  to  make  an  act 
of  faith.  Would  it  not  be  better  for  Mr.  Pope  to  show  how  the 
Protestant  child  could  make  an  act  of  faith,  than  to  treat  us  to  a 
sermon  on  the  Bible,  quoting  St.  Augustin  as  to  its  utility — a 
thing  which  I  surely  never  denied.  I  trust  in  heaven  I  shall 
never  forbid  the  reading  of  the  holy  Bible,  under  proper  circum- 
stances. St.  Augustin  speaks  of  the  perusal  of  the  sacred 
scriptures  being  useful  to  children ;  does  he  thereby  constitute 
them  as  infallible  authorities  to  decide  upon  its  meaning?  The 
man  who  recognizes  an  infallible  authority,  believes  in  articles 
of  faith  which  he  could  otherwise  never  ascertain  of  himself 
whether  they  came  from  God,  or  were  committed  to  writing  by 
men  inspired  by  him.  I  have  shown  that  Christ  left  a  sure  and 
certain  guide  to  direct  mankind.  If  God  had  not  appointed  a 
guide  to  direct  man,  he  would  have  left  the  mass  of  mankind 
involved  in  ignorance  and  error.  If  the  Bible  contain  divine 
truths,  of  what  utility  would  it  be  to  the  ignorant,  if  they  pos- 
sessed not  the  means  of  ascertaining  whether  it  be  the  work  of 
God  ?  Mr.  Pope  has  not  shown  how  the  ignorant  can  ascertain 
whether  the  Bible  be  the  word  of  God.  If  the  Bible  exclusively 
contains  the  word  of  God,  will  Mr.  Pope  show  us  from  the 
Bible,  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost — baptism  with  the  sign 
of  the  cross — con  substantiality — and  that  infants  may  be  bap- 
tized contrary  to  the  practice  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles'?  I 
understand  that  Mr.  Pope  indeed  is  a  dissenter  frc/m  the  church 
of  England  on  those  points.  But  that  fact  alone  proves  that 
there  is  no  unity  of  doctrines  amongst  Protestants,  and   thai 

9* 


102  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

while  the  Bible  teaches  one  Protestant  to  believe  one  thing,  it 
teaches  a  second  Protestant  to  believe  another  thing.  There 
are  many  articles  of  faith  admitted  by  Protestants,  not  to  be 
found  in  the  Bible.  Will  Mr.  Pope  show  me  from  the  Bible, 
an  authority  for  changing  the  Sabbath  1  Mr.  Pope  said  the 
Apostles  broke  bread  on  that  day  of  the  week.  Why,  the  Apos- 
tles broke  bread  upon  every  day  in  the  week.  That  was  an 
extremely  weak  and  foolish  argument  to  introduce  to  justify 
such  a  change.  It  appears  that  Mr.  Pope  imagined  he  had 
caught  me  in  an  historical  error.  He  says  I  have  quoted  Beza 
as  one  of  those  who  translated  the  Bible  in  the  reign  of  James  I. 
I  deny  the  fact — I  accused  Luther,  Beza,  and  others,  of  wilfully 
corrupting  the  Bible  ;  but  not  the  Bible  as  translated  in  James 
I's  reign.  Would  Mr.  Pope  insinuate  that  there  were  no  other 
translations  prior  to  that  time  ?  Has  he  never  heard  of  one  by 
Luther — one  by  Zuinglius — one  by  Qllcolampadius,  &c,  &c? 

Latimer  corrupted  the  text,  and  bid  defiance  to  all  authority — 
so  did  Cranmer,  and  Henry  VHI, — he  who,  after  leading  a  bad 
life,  when  his  end  approached,  thought  only  of  saving  his  soul, 
and  accordingly  returned  to  that  church  where  certainty  and  truth 
were  alone  to  be  found.  But  Mr.  Pope  has  given  up  Henry 
VHI,  Luther,  and  Cranmer, — he  scarcely  defended  Beza ;  and 
he  ventured  not  to  whisper  a  word  in  support  of  Zuinglius,  who 
received  his  doctrine  against  transubstantiation  t>om  a  spirit,  as 
he  says  himself,  nescio  ah  albo,  vel  nigro. 

Mr.  Pope  talks  of  a  Catholic  clergyman  having  misquoted 
Luther,  in  asserting  that  Luther  called  Moses  a  hangman.  Mr. 
Pope  says  he  only  calls  him  an  executioner.  What  is  an  exe- 
cutioner but  a  hangman  ?  I  deny  that  Mr.  Pope  interprets  the 
German  text  correctly.  I  have  the  original  work  of  Luther,  in 
German,  here  on  the  table,  and  the  celebrated  Pichler  says  that 
the  word  employed  by  Luther  does  mean  hangman. 

As  to  Mr.  Pope's  arguments  respecting  the  deposing  power 
assumed  by  some  pontiffs — I  never  said  the  Popes  were  infalli- 
ble. Moreover,  Christ  did  not  combine  the  quality  of  impecca- 
Dility  with  the  prerogative  of  infallibility.  Judas  did  not  lose  his 
faith  when  he  betrayed  his  master — and  Christ  says  to  Peter, — 

"  But  I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not ;  and  thou  being  once 
converted,  confirm  thy  brethren." — (Luke,  xxii,  32.) 

Infallibility  and  impeccability  are  not  then  inseparable,  as  Mr. 
Pope  would  maintain.  Out  of  nearly  three  hundred  Popes, 
there  are  only  eleven  whose  conduct  and  lives  can  be  arraigned 
as  absolutely  criminal.  Who  is  there  here  that  has  not  com- 
mitted sin?  Let  him  who  is  spotless  throw  the  first  stone. 
We  hear  enough  of  "  saints"  in  these  days — but  we  know  thiit 
ou;'  Saviour  compared  the  Pharisees  to  white-washed  sepulcl/es 


OF    PRIVATE    JUDGMENT.  103 

It  is  ea&y  enough  to  assume  the  appearance  of  sanctity,  ajd  to 
put  on  a  puritanical  face.  I  again  ask  Mr.  Pope  how  the  Pro- 
testant child  can  be  led  by  internal  evidence  to  make  an  act  oi 
faith,  and  that  too  upon  the  Bible,  before  he  can  know  that  it  is 
the  word  of  God  ?  I  repeat  the  question  which  I  have  already 
urged  respecting  the  Socinian.  Does  not  Mr.  Pope  violate  the 
principle  of  private  judgment  when  he  endeavours  to  force  his 
interpretation  of  the  scriptures  upon  the  Socinian  ?  Has  not 
the  Socinian  as  good  a  right  to  attack  the  private  judgment  of 
Mr.  Pope  ?  If  I  could  not  convince  the  Socinian  of  the  divinity 
of  Christ  by  the  authority  of  the  church,  I  would  not,  at  all 
events,  go  in  direct  opposition  to  my  avowed  and  well  knoM^n 
principles.  I  would  force  upon  him  the  general  agreement  of 
nations  which  ascribes  to  Christ  the  establishment  of  a  church, 
and  of  an  infallible  guide.  As  I  said  already,  I  would  shame 
him  into  conviction,  by  appealing  to  the  consent  of  nations,  all 
differing  from  each  other  on  other  subjects,  and  yet  agreeing  in 
this  point — I  would  prove  that  the  vox  Popidi  wa«  here  truly  the 
vox  Dei.  I  would  show  him  the  voice  of  God  in  the  church, 
and  that  he  was,  therefore,  called  upon  to  obey.  If  I  left  him 
unconvinced  I  would  enjoy  this  advantage  over  Mr.  Pope,  that 
he  could  not  charge  me  with  self-contradiction.  But  the  diffi- 
culties which  Mr.  Pope  would  have  to  encounter  with  the  Soci- 
nian are  insuperable.  The  Socinian  would  say,  that  he  could 
not  conscientiously  believe  that  a  God  could  suffer  death — he 
would  not  allow  it,  because  he  would  say  it  was  against  reason. 
In  vain  would  Mr.  Pope  adduce  against  him  the  evidence  of  the 
Bible.  The  Socinian  would  appeal  to  the  grand  charter  of 
gospel  liberty,  the  right  of  private  judgment.  If  the  Bible  can 
be  interpreted  by  private  judgment,  I  should  like  to  know  from 
Mr.  Pope,  with  the  aid  of  his  internal  illumination,  what  is  the 
meaning  of  that  passage  in  Zacharias,  where  the  prophet  says, 
"  upon  one  stone  there  are  seven  eyes."  I  should  also  like  to 
know  from  him,  why  did  God  forbid  fish  to  be  offered  by  the 
Jews  in  sacrifice  ?  And  why  did  God  command  the  Jews  not 
to  wear  drugget  ?  Can  Mr.  Pope  interpret  these  difficult  mas- 
sages 1  Are  there  ten  Protestants  here  who  will  give  the  same 
interpretation  to  any  one  text  of  scripture  ?  Will  it  be  said,  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  can  infuse  the  spirit  of  contradiction.  Every 
heretic  may  have  recourse  to  this  rule  of  private  judgment,  and 
by  it  justify  his  errors.  It  is  good  for  society  that  obedience  be 
rendered  to  human  power — why  not  also  to  spiritual  power  ? 
If  a  fallible  authority  is  to  be  obeyed  by  man,  when  he  is  not 
able  to  live  by  himself,  a  forliori,  he  should  yield  obedience  to 
an  infallible  authority  in  the  great  and  important  concern  of  his 
salvation.     If  temporal  power  be  not  established  in  societv* 


104  THE    DIVINE    RIGHT 

neither  order  nor  regularity  will  exist.  A  similar  authority 
should  exist  in  the  spiritual  society  instituted  by  Christ.  If  it 
be  a  fact,  that  the  church  of  Christ  could  teach  error,  then  the 
more  perfect  dispensation  of  the  Son  of  God,  did  not  leave  us 
any  thing  equal  to  the  Jewish  synagogue,  which,  until  his  com- 
ing, did  not  err  in  the  faith.  And  yet  Mr.  Pope  will  have  it, 
that  the  church  of  Christ  has  erred. 

Mr.  Pope  will  not  yield  his  assent  to  that  which  is  borne  out 
by  the  general  consent  of  many  and  different  nations  from  the  first 
era  of  Christianity.  The  principle  which  Mr.  Pope  advocates 
are  those  upon  which  Arius  and  Eutyches,  Cerinthus,  and  all 
other  heretics,  ground  their  defence.  They  are  the  principles 
which  inspired  the  wdld  men  and  women  in  Germany,  who 
danced  naked  through  the  streets,  shouting  aloud  that  the  king- 
doms of  the  earth  were  given  unto  them,  with  an  army  of  fifty 
thousand  to  make  good  their  claims.  These  are  instances,  I 
will  be  told,  of  the  abuse  of  private  judgment,  but  they  are  abuses 
necessarily  flowing  from  the  principle  itself.  I  would  ask,  when 
the  principle  is  once  granted,  where  is  the  guarantee  against  its 
abuse.  Is  it  to  be  unlimited  in  its  nature  ;  or  will  Mr.  Pope 
venture  to  draw  out  the  line  of  demarcation  ?  Or  rather,  will  he 
not — must  he  not,  to  be  at  all  consistent,  allow  every  individual 
to  do  as  he  pleases  ? 

Jesus  Christ  is  the  real  high  priest — the  corner-stone  of  his 
church,  and  the  Apostles  and  their  successors  are  the  super- 
structure, teaching  and  preaching,*  through  the  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Ghost, 

"  And  I  will  ask  the  Father  (says  our  Saviour  to  his  Apostles)  and  he 
shall  give  you  another  Paraclete,  that  he  may  abide  with  you  for  ever." — 
John,  xiv,  16. 

I  shall  again  put  the  question  (which  I  have  so  often  repeated) 
in  due  form  to  Mr.  Pope,  and  if  he  be  a  sincere  lover  of  truth,  I 
expect  an  answer  from  him  in  plain  and  obvious  terms.  I  call 
upon  him  to  point  out  in  what  manner  a  Protestant  child,  before 
he  arrives  at  the  years  of  discretion,  can  make  an  act  of  faith, 
or  how  he  can  ascertain  the  authority  of  the  scriptures  ?  He 
must  remain  a  doubter,  and  consequently  an  infidel.  But  the 
Catholic  has  but  one  single,  solitary  fact  to  establish,  namely, 
the  authority  of  the  church ;  in  arriving  at  that,  he  is  at  hberty 
to  exercise  his  judgment,  but  when  he  has  once  ascertained  the 
fact,  he  yields  to  the  church  unlimited  obedience  in  matters  of 
faith.  But  the  Protestant  possesses  no  such  means  to  enable 
him  to  make  an  act  of  faith.  All  great  writers  have  seen  this 
difficulty.  It  was  acknowledged  by  Claude  in  the  celebrated 
discussion  with  Bossuet,  and  he  endeavoured  to  throw  it  back 
on  Bossuet,  as  Mr.  Pope  has  attempted  to  do  with  me. 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  105 

But  I  have  shown  that  the  Catholic  can  make  the  act  of  faith, 
after  he  has  ascertained  the  simple  fact  of  the  church's  authority. 
While  the  Protestant  must  ascertain  that  every  single  text  of 
scripture  is  inspired,  and  that  all  are  preserved  pure  and  un- 
changed, as  they  were  originally  written  by  the  Apostles.  The 
Protestant  must  travel  through  this  impracticable  inquiry,  there- 
fore it  is  impossible  that  he  can  make  an  act  of  faith.  While, 
on  the  contrary,  the  Catholic  has  simply  to  ascertain  the  author- 
ity of  the  church,  and  then  to  yield  obedience  to  it.  It  was  for 
that  purpose  Christ  left  us  his  church  upon  earth ;  and  St.  Peter  ' 
says  of  the  scriptures — 

"In  which  there  are  some  things  hard  to  be  understood,  which  the  un- 
learned and  unstable  wrest,  as  also  the  other  scriptures,  to  their  own  perdi- 
tion."—(2  Peter,  iii,  16.) 

It  is  manifest,  then,  that  there  must  exist  an  authority  to  direct 
us  in  the  interpretation  of  the  sacred  volume. 

1  beg  to  conclude  this  day's  discussion,  by  apologizing  for 
the  many  disadvantages  under  which  I  labor.  I  am  not  able  to 
engage  your  fancy  by  language  shining  and  sparkhng  as  a  bottle 
of  champaign.  I  possess  not  the  powers  of  oratory  to  catch  the 
feelings,  and  to  lead  captive  the  understandings  of  my  auditory. 
If  truth  did  not  combat  on  my  side,  how  is  it  possible  that  a  man 
like  me,  who  cannot  boast  of  much  learning — who  has  been  for 
years  engaged  in  the  laborious  duties  of  the  mission,  and  totally 
estranged  from  the  pursuits  of^hterature,  could  meet  and  oppose, 
by  sound  arguments,  the  reasonings  of  a  man  hke  Mr.  Pope, 
who  has  devoted  his  life  to  the  study  of  this  subject,  and  whc 
has  nothing  else  to  occupy  his  attention. 


Third  Day. — Saturday,  April  21. 


SUBJECT.—"  The  Doctrine  of  Purgatory^ 

At  eleven  o'clock  the  chair  was  taken  by  Admiral  Oliver 
and  John  O'Brien,  Esq.,  of  Elmvale. 

Mr.  Pope  rose,  and  called  on  Mr.  Maguire  for  his^roofs  oi 
the  doctrine  of  Purgatory. 

Mr.  Maguire. — Gentlemen,  I  appear  this  day  at  the  bar  of 
public  opinion,  to  defend  a  doctrine  in  which  we  are  all  equally 
concerned — that  there  do  exist  prejudices  against  that  doctrine 
amongst  many  of  my  Protestant  countrymen,  is  too  notorious 


106  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

to  be  questioned.  If  I  should  be  happy  enough  to  remove  any 
of  them,  it  will  be  doing  much  for  your  salvation,  and  will  afford 
me  sincere  pleasure.  If  this  doctrine  of  purgatory  be  once 
removed, — if  this  most  consolatory  dogma  be  discarded, — you 
must  then  resort  to  the  dreadful  alternative  of  believing  that  the 
moment  the  soul  is  departed  from  the  body,  it  is  either  plunged 
Jbr  eternity  into  the  depths  of  hell,  or  borne  triumphantly  by  the 
angels  of  God  into  the  realms  of  endless  bliss.  Is  there  any 
person  here  so  presumptuous  as  to  say,  that  he  expects  with 
confidence,  the  moment  of  his  dissolution  to  appear  before  a 
merciful  but  essentially  just  Judge,  white  as  the  snows  of  hea- 
ven, and  pure  as  the  angels  of  God  1  I  wish  any  man  who  may 
possess  it  joy  of  such  confidence — most  assuredly  it  is  not  mine. 

Before  I  proceed  to  my  direct  proofs  of  purgatory,  (for  I  only 
deal  in  direct  arguments)  I  may  here  remind  you,  though  per- 
haps I  am  not  strictly  in  order  in  so  doing,  that  I  proposed 
yesterday  three  arguments  to  my  learned  friend,  at  which,  as 
appears  to  me,  he  has  scarcely  condescended  to  glance.  I 
asked  him  what  was  the  last  resolution  of  an  act  of  faith  in  the 
mind  of  a  Protestant.  I  called  upon  him  to  explain  to  the 
satisfaction  of  the  meeting,  how  a  Protestant  on  taking  the  Bible 
into  his  hands,  could  make  an  act  of  divine  faith  upon  the  abso- 
lute inspiration  of  the  sacred  scriptures.  I  called  upon  him  to 
show,  by  what  means  he  could  make  any  rational  impression 
upon  the  mind  of  the  Socinian,  who  admits  the  scriptures,  and 
who  also  admits  the  right  of  private  judgment  in  common  with 
Mr.  Pope.  I  wanted  him  to  show  how  he  would  impress  upon 
the  mind  of  the  Socinian,  that  fundamental  doctrine  of  Chris- 
tianity— the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  moment  Mr.  Pope 
attempts  to  press  his  particular  interpretation  on  the  Socinian, 
the  latter  claims  an  equal  right  to  choose  his  own  interpretation 
of  the  text — he  tells  Mr.  Pope,  that  he  is  violating  the  principle 
of  private  judgment,  and  that  he  should  not  monopolize  and 
appropriate  to  himself,  that  which  was  every  man's  birth-right. 
He  asserts,  moreover,  that  his  interpretation  is  more  rational 
than  that  of  Mr.  Pope,  who  proposes  a  doctrine  (he  will  say) 
opposed  to  human  reason,  and  to  common  sense.  When,  there- 
fore, Mr.  Pope  should  propose  to  the  Socinian,  doctrines  above 
human  co|pprehen3ion,  he  justly  claims  his  own  right  of  private 
judgment*  he  weighs  all  mysteries  in  the  scale  of  human  reason, 
and  taxes  Mr.  Pope  with  a  violation  of  his  hereditary  right. 

I  asked  Mr.  Pope,  how  he  could,  with  the  Bible  in  his  hand, 
convert  the  benighted  pagan?  The  latter  in  search  of  truth, 
takes  up  the  scriptures,  reads  therein  several  passages,  which, 
lo  a  mind  not  endowed  with  spiritual  light,  may  appear  to  sanc- 
tion the  most  desperate  crimes  :  he  is  besot  on  all  sides  by  the 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORI".         107 

objections  of  deists  and  atheists — of  Yoltaire,  Diderot,  Rous- 
Beau,  Julian  the  apostate,  Celsus,  Porphyry,  &c.  And  if  St. 
iliignstin  had  to  write  four  large  volumes  to  reconcile  the  four 
evangf^ lists,  is  it  not  plain  that  the  half-converted  infidel  must 
have  recourse  to  the  authority  of  the  church,  to  solve  all  his 
difficulties,  and  remove  his  doubts?  or,  if  he  would  not  trust  to 
that  authority,  he  must  be  able  to  explain  away  all  the  objections 
of  the  deists — to  compare  and  examine  every  passage  in  the 
Bible  ;  he  must  prove  the  authenticity,  the  integrity  and  the 
inspiration  of  the  scriptures, — and  here  is  a  task,  which  I  hum- 
bly conceive  Mr.  Pope  himself  is  not  adequate  to  perform. 
These  are  the  three  points  which  I  have  repeatedly  urged  upon 
(he  attention  of  Mr.  Pope,  and  which  he  has  not  met  to  the 
satisfaction  of  this  meeting. 

I  now  come  to  my  direct  proofs  of  Purgatory.  I  shall  first 
state  what  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church  on  the  subject. 
According  to  the  Roman  Catholic  faith,  we  believe  that  after 
the  Almighty  God  has  forgiven  the  sins  actually  committed  by 
man,  as  to  the  eternal  punishment  a  temporal  punishment  may  be 
annexed  by  God  as  the  effect  of  sin,  and  may  remain  after  the 
eternal  punishment  has  been  remitted.  This  temporal  penalty 
may  be  inflicted  in  this  life,  or  may  be  inflicted  in  the  next. 
Thus,  after  the  fall  of  Adam,  though  his  sin  was  washed  out  by 
faith  in  a  future  Saviour's  blood,  still  death  remained  as  the  tem- 
poral punishment  and  consequence  of  the  original  sin  of  Adam. 

When  David  was  guilty  of  the  double  crime  of  adultery  and 
murder,  and  when  the  prophet  Nathan  announced  to  him,  upon 
the  authority  of  God  himself,  that  his  crimes  were  forgiven  by 
the  Lord  of  Hosts,  he  at  the  same  time  annexed  to  the  forgive- 
ness of  the  eternal  penalty  a  temporal  punishment,  for  he  declared 
to  David  that  his  adulterous  offspring  should  not  live.  David 
v/ept  bitterly — he  bedewed  the  sheets  of  his  bed  with  tears,  and 
he  besought  the  Lord  that  his  child  might  live ;  but  the  child 
died,  and  this  was  a  temporal  punishment  annexed  to  the  sin, 
after  the  eternal  had  been  forgiven.  Catholics  do  not  hold  that 
there  is  any  particular  fire  in  purgatory.  The  church  has  not 
taken  upon  herself  to  determine  where  purgatory  exists ; — ail 
she  has  defined  in  the  council  of  Trent,  which  is  very  explicit  on 
the  subject,  is,  to  pronounce  it  an  article  of  faith,  that  there 
exists  a  third  place,  where  the  soul  of  some  go  after'death,  and 
where  they  are  detained  by  Almighty  God,  till  they  are  purified 
and  prepared  for  heaven.  That,  after  a  certain  detention  there, 
through  the  mercy  of  God,  and  the  prayers  and  suffrages  of  the 
faithful  on  earth,  they  are  received  into  heaven.  This  is  a  plain 
dogma.  It  has  nothing  to  do  with  racks,  tortures,  or  fires,  or 
niany  other  thirigs  with  which,  no  doubt,  in  the  minds  of  somo 


108  THE    DOCTRINE    CF  PURGATORY. 

present,  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  has  been  heretofore  associated. 
It  now  remains  with  you  to  see  what  are  the  proofs  of  purgatory, 
and  what  the  motives  of  credibihty  which  induce  CathoUcs  to 
beUeve  in  that  doctrine.  The  first  text  I  shall  quote  to  you  is 
from  St.  Matthew,  ch.  v,  ver.  25,  26. 

"  Make  an  agreement  with  thy  adversary  quTckly,  whilst  thou  art  in  the 
way  with  him ;  lest  perhaps  the  adversary  dehver  thee  to  the  judge,  and  the 
judge  dehver  thee  to  the  officer,  and  thou  be  cast  into  prison.  A'men,  I  say 
lo  thee,  thou  shalt  not  go  out  from  thence,  till  thou  pay  the  last  farthing." 

It  is  very  clear  that  the  words  here  "  whilst  thou  art  in  the 
way,"  mean  whilst  in  this  life  ;  and  that  the  expression  which 
follows,  "  lest  thy  adversary  deliver  thee  to  the  judge,  and  the 
judge  to  the  officer,  and  thou  be  cast  into  prison,'^  from  whence 
there  is  no  release  till  the  last  farthing  shall  be  paid,  means,  lest 
thou  shalt  be  overtaken  by  death,  who  comes  like  a  thief  in  the 
night,  and  be  cast  into  purgatory,  where  the  last  farthing  shall 
be  paid — that  is,  all  your  sins  rnust  be  expiated  by  suffering, 
before  you  shall  be  released,  and  admitted  into  the  regions  of 
bliss.  I  pretend  not  to  give  a  particular  description  of  the  place 
to  which  the  sacred  text  alludes,  but  I  leave  the  passage  to  make 
its  due  impression  upon  the  mind  of  every  honorable  Protestant. 
The  next  passage  I  shall  cit-e  is  from  St.  Matthew,  ch.  xii,  ver. 
32,  36. 

"  And  whosoever  shall  speak  a  word  against  the  Son  of  man,  it  shall  be 
forgiven  him ;  but  he  that  shall  speak  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not 
be  forgiven  him,  either  in  this  world,  or  in  the  world  to  come.  But  1  say 
unto  you,  that  every  idle  word  that  men  shall  speak,  they  shall  render  an 
account  for  it  in  the  day  of  judgment." 

Here  our  Saviour  makes  the  utterance  of  a  single  idle  word  a 
sin  to  be  accounted  for  at  the  day  of  judgment.  Is  the  suppo- 
sition violent  that  a  man  may  suddenly  expire  after  the  expression 
of  an  idle  word.  That  idle  word  does  not  constitute  a  mortal 
fcin  sufficient  to  damn  him  for  ever ;  it  is  that  species  of  sin  to 
which  the  prophet  alludes  when  he  says,  that  the  just  man  falls 
seven  times  a-day.  He  could  not  be  a  just  man  if  these  were 
mortal  sins.  If  then  a  man  be  suddenly  carried  off  in  an  apo- 
plectic fit,  and  cannot  enter  heaven  on  account  of  the  utterance 
of  a  single  word,  where  does  he  go  ?  I  beg  leave  to  refer  you  to 
the  1st  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  iii,  8, 12, 13, 14, 15. 

"  Now  he  who  planteth,  and  he  who  watereth  are  one.  And  every  one 
shall  receive  reward  according  to  his  own  labour.  Now  if  any  man  build 
upon  this  foundation,  gold,  silver,  precious  stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble ;  every 
HKin's  work  shall  be  made  manifest;  for  the  day  of  the  Lord  shall  declare  it, 
because  it  shall  be  revealed  by  fire  j  and  the  fire  shall  try  every  man's  work 
of  what  sort  it  is.  If  any  man's  work  abide  which  he  hatli  built  thereupon  ; 
he  shall  receive  a  reward.  If  any  man's  work  burn  he  shall  suffer  loss;  but 
he  himself  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  i^ire." 

I  may  here  remark,  what  I  shall  prove — that  of  seventeen 


THE  DOCTRINL  OF  PURGATC  RY.         109 

holy  fathers  of  the  2d,  3d,  4th,  and  5th  centuries,  from  whose 
works  I  shall  hereafter  give  you  ample  quotations,  there  is  not 
one,  with  the  exception  of  two,  that  does  not  refer  to  the  foregoing 
text  in  proof  of  the  existence  of  purgatory.  I  shall  only  say 
that  if  any  passages  shall  be  adduced  from  scripture,  against 
purgatory  clearer  than  this  text,  which  is  manifestly  in  support 
of  that  doctrine,  I  will  then  acknowledge  that  I  am  wrong.  I 
shall  next  refer  you  to  2d  Corinthians,  i,  11. 

"You,"  St.  Paul  says,  "helping  withal  in  prayer  for  us;  that  for  this  gift 
obtained  for  us  by  many  persons  thanks  may  be  given  by  many  in  our  behalf." 

St.  Paul  here  begs  the  prayers  of  the  Corinthians — these 
prayers,  it  is  true,  were  for  the  living — and  /  therefore  am  not  for 
contending  that  this  text  is  a  clear  one  in  favor  of  purgatory. 
But  if  prayers  for  the  living  be  justifiable  and  proper,  I  cannot 
undersand  why  prayers  for  the  dead  should  be  condemned. 
Again,  1st  Peter,  iii,  18,  19,  20. 

"Because  Christ  also  died  once  for  our  sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he 
might  offer  us  to  God,  being  put  to  death  indeed  in  the  flesh,  but  brought  to 
life  by  the  spirit.  In  which  also  he  came  and  preached  to  those  spirits  who 
were  in  prison ;  who  in  time  past  had  been  incredulous  when  they  waited  for 
the  patience  of  God  in  the  days  of  Noe,  when  the  ark  was  a  building;  in 
which  few,  that  is  eight  souls,  were  saved  by  water. 

Here  we  find  a  prison  spoken  of,  into  which  Christ  entered 
and  preached  to  the  dead.  Here  is  a  manifest  acknowledgment 
of  a  third  place.  The  creed  says,  that  Christ  descended  into 
hell — surely  not  into  the  hell  of  the  damned — for  it  is  recorded, 
that  Christ  released  those  who  were  detained  therein.  Will  it 
be  shown  that  the  place  referred  to  in  this  text,  and  into  ivhlch 
Christ  entered  has  ceased  to  exist  1 

Our  Saviour  says,  Matt,  xii,  32, 

"  And  whosoever  shall  speak  a  word  against  the  Son  of  man,  it  shall  be 
forgiven  him ;  but  he  that  shall  speak  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not 
be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world  nor  in  the  world  to  come." 

Now  as  St.  Augustin  justly  remarks,  in  commenting  on  this 
passage,  if  no  sin  can  be  forgiven  in  the  world  to  come,  the 
argument  of  Christ  has  lost  its  force ;  and  as  in  that  case  it 
would  be  equally  impossible  to  obtain  forgiveness  in  the  world  to 
come  for  sins  against  the  Father  and  the  Son,  as  for  those  against 
the  Holy  Ghost,  the  passage  would  mean  nothing.  I  shall  add 
to  the  quotations  which  I  have  already  given,  the  following  from 
the  2d  book  of  Maccabees,  xii,  43.  We  find  it  there  recorded, 
that  Judas  Maccabeus 

"Making  a  gathering,  he  sent  twelve  thousand  drachms  of  silver  to  Jeru- 
salem for  sacrifice,  to  be  offered  for  the  sins  of  the  dead,  thinking  well  and 
religiously  concerning  the  resurrection." 

And  it  is  added,  "It  is  therefore  a  holy  and  wholesome  thought  to  pray  for 
the  dead,  that  they  may  be  loosed  from  their  sins." 

xo 


110  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORT, 

I  am  well  aware  that  we  shall  hear  arguments  urged  against 
the  canonicity  of  this  book.  But  I  shall  only  use  it  as  an 
historical  testimony  for  the  present ;  and  as  such  it  proves,  that 
Judas  Maccabeus  offered  up  prayers  for  the  dead,  ''  deeming  it 
a  holy  and  wholesome  thought  to  pray  for  the  dead,  that  they 
may  be  loosed  from  their  sins." 

As  an  historical  record,  it  testifies  that  the  practice  of  praying 
for  the  dead  existed  among  the  Jews.  When  Christ  condemned 
the  fables  and  inventions  of  the  Pharisees,  why  did  he  not  point 
his  indignant  censure  against  this  practice,  and  condemn  this 
portion  of  the  public  worship  of  the  Jews  as  superstitious,  or 
unjustifiabie?  I  would  wish  much  that  Mr.  Pope  would  adhere 
to  strict  argument  and  logical  deduction.  It  will  be  in  vain  for 
him  to  meet  direct  arguments,  drawn  from  Scripture,  and  from 
the  practice  of  the  church  during  the  first  five  hundred  years  of 
the  Christian  sera,  by  an  historical  quihhle.  Such  a  subterfuge 
exposes  the  weakness  of  his  arguments. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  lay  before  you  various  quotations  from 
the  fathers  on  the  present  subject,  and  I  pledge  myself  to  their 
accuracy  and  authendcity.  Tertullian  says,  De  Corona  Militum, 
p.  209, 

"Amoncr  the  Apostolical  traditions  received  from  our  fathers,  we  have 
oblations  for  the  dead  on  the  anniversary  day — oblationes  pro  defunctis  annua 
die  facimus." 

In  his  treaties  on  Monogamy,  cap.  x,  p.  555,  he  thus  advises 
a  widow — 

"Pray  for  the  soul  of  your  departed  husband,  entreating  repose  to  him  and 
participation  in  the  first  resurrection — making  oblations  for  him  on  the  anni- 
versaries of  his  death,  which,  if  you  neglect,  it  may  be  truly  said  of  you,  that, 
as  far  as  in  you  hes,  you  have  repudiated  your  husband." 

And  addressing  widowers,  he  says,  exhortatio  ad  castitatem, 
cap.  ix, 

"Reflect  for  whose  soul  you  pray — for  whom  you  make  annual  oblations. 
Pro  cujus  spiritu  postules — pro  qua  oblationes  annuas  reddas." 

The  holy  Father  and  Martyr,  Cyprian,  who  lived  in  the  2d 
century,  says, 

"Our  predecessors  prudently  advised,  that  no  brother  departing  this  life 
should  nominate  any  churchman  his  executor;  and  should  he  do  it,  that  no 
oblation  should  be  made  for  him,  nor  sacrihce  offered  for  his  repose — of  which 
we  have  had  a  late  example,  when  no  oblation  was  made,  nor  prayer  in  his 
name  offered  in  the  church." — Epist.  i,  p.  2. 

And  again — "It  is  one  thing  to  be  a  petitioner  for  pardon,  and  another  to 
arrive  at  glory ;  one  to  be  c^st  into  prison  and  not  to  go  out  from  thence  till 
the  last  farthing  he  paid,  and  another  to  receive  at  once  the  reward  of  faith 
and  virtue;  one,  in  punishment  of  sin,  to  he  purified  by  long  suffering,  and 
purged  long  by  fire — and  another  to  have  expiated  all  sins  by  (previous) 
Euffering;  one,  in  fine,  at  the  day  of  judgment,  to  wait  the  sentence  of  the 
Lord;  another  to  receive  an  immediate  crown  from  him." — Epist.  cv,  p.  lOS. 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORr.  Ill 

Origen  (Homily  6.  in  Exod.  tome  ii,  p.  148),  says, 

"He  that  is  saved  is  saved  by  fire ;  so  that  if  he  has  in  him  any  thing  of 
the  nature  of  lead  that  the  fire  may  purge,  and  reduce  it  till  the  mass  become 
pure  gold.  Gtui  salvus  fit  per  ignem  salvus  fit  ut  id  ignis  decoquat,  et  resolvat. 
For  the  gold  of  that  land  which  the  saints  are  to  inhabit  is  said  to  be  pure, 
and  as  '  the  furnace  trieth  gold,  so  doth  temptatation  try  the  just.' — Eccles. 
27.  We  must  then  all  come  to  this  proof,  '  for  the  Lord  sits  as  a  refiner, 
(Mai.  iii,  3,)  and  he  shall  purify  the  sons  of  Levi.'  But  when  we  shall  arrive 
at  that  place,  who  shall  bring  many  good  works,  and  little  that  is  evil;  this 
evil  the  fire  shall  purify  as  it  does  lead,  and  the  whole  shall  become  pure  gold. 
He  that  takes  with  him  more  of  lead,  sufTers  the  fire  more,  that  he  may  be 
refined,  and  what  little  there  is  of  gold,  after  the  purification,  remains.  But 
should  the  whole  mass  be  lead,  that  man  must  experience  what  is  written  : 
*the  sea  covered  them ;  they  sank  as  lead  in  the  mighty  waters.' — Exod.  xv, 
10.  Sin  in  its  nature  is  like  to  that  matter  which  fire  consumes,  and  which 
the  Apostle  says  is  built  up  by  sinners,  who  upon  the  foundation  of  Christ 
build  wood,  hay,  and  stubble.' — 1  Cor.  iii,  12.  Which  words  manifestly  show, 
that  there  are  some  sins  so  light  as  to  be  compared  to  stubble ;  to  which, 
when  fire  is  set  it  cannot  dwell  long — cui  utique  ignis  illatus  diu  non  potest 
immorari ;  that  there  are  others  like  to  hay,  which  the  fire  easily  consumes, 
but  a  little  more  slowly  than  it  does  stubble  ;  and  others  resemble  wood,  in 
which,  according  to  the  degree  of  criminality,  the  fire  finds  an  abundant 
substance  on  which  to  feed.  Thus  each  crime,  in  proportion  to  its  character, 
experiences  a  just  degree  of  punishment. 

"  When  we  depart  this  life,  if  we  take  with  us  virtues  or  vices,  shall  we 
receive  rewards  for  our  virtues,  and  those  trespasses  be  forgiven  to  us  which 
we  knowingly  committed ;  or  shall  we  be  punished  for  our  faults  and  not 
receive  the  rewards  of  our  virtues  ?  Neither  is  true :  because  we  shall  suffer 
for  our  sins,  and  receive  the  rewards  of  our  good  actions.  For  if  on  the 
foundation  of  Christ  you  shall  have  built  not  only  gold  and  silver,  and  precious 
stones,  but  also  wood,  and  hay,  and  stubble,  what  do  you  expect,  when  tne 
same  shall  be  separated  from  the  body  ?  Would  you  enter  into  heaven  with 
your  wood,  and  hay,  and  stubble,  to  defile  the  kingdom  of  God ;  or,  on 
account  of  those  incumbrances,  receive  no  reward  for  your  gold  and  silver, 
and  precious  stones?  Neither  is  this  just.  It  remains,  then,  that  you  be 
committed  to  the  fire,  which  shall  consume  the  light  materials  ;  for  our  God, 
to  those  who  can  comprehend  heavenly  things,  is  called  a  consuming  fire. 
But  this  fire  consumes  not  the  creature,  but  what  the  creature  has  himself 
built — wood,  and  hay,  and  stubble.  Frst,  therefore,  we  suffer  on  account  of 
our  transgressions,  and  then  we  receive  our  reward." — Homily,  xvi,  in 
Jerome,  tom.  iii. 

I  have  here  thirty-five  quotations  from  Origen,  all  to  the  same 
effect,  and  m  every  one  of  which  he  alludes  to  the  text  of  St. 
Paul  relative  to  the  hay,  wood,  and  stubble,  and  the  consequent 
purgation  by  fire. 

Eusebius  of  Coesarea,  who  belonged  to  the  Greek  church, 
describing  the  funeral  of  the  emperor  Constantine  the  Great, 
thus  writes — 

"In  this  manner  did  Constantius  perform  the  last  duties  in  honour  of  hia 
father.  But  when  he  had  departed  with  his  guards,  the  ministers  of  God, 
snrrounded  by  the  multitude  of  the  faithful,  advanced  into  the  middle  space, 
and  with  prayers  performed  the  ceremonies  of  divine  worship :  the  blessed 
prince,  reposing  in  his  coffin,  was  extolled  with  many  praises;  when  the 
people  in  concert  with  the  priests,  not  without  sighs  and  teai  %  offsred  prayers 
to  heaven  for  his  soul ;  in  this  manifesting  the  most  acceptable  service  to  a 


112  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

religious  pnnce.  God  thus  gave  him  a  place  near  the  bodies  of  the  holy 
Apostles,  in  order  that  he  may  enjoy  their  blessed  fellowship,  and  in  theit 
temple  be  associated  with  the  people  of  God.  He  would  thus  also  be  admitted 
to  a  participation  in  the  religious  rites,  the  mystic  sacrifice,  and  holy  suffrages 
of  the  faithful."— De  Vita  Constant.  Lib.  xi. 

Arnobius,  the  master  of  Lactantius,  and  rhetorician  at  Sicca,  in 
Nuniidia,  who  lived  about  the  end  of  the  3rd  century,  thus  writes  : 

"Why  were  the  oratories  (of  the  Christians)  destined  to  savage  destruction 
wherein  prayers  are  offered  up  to  the  sovereign  God ;  peace  and  pardon  are 
implored  for  all  men,  magistrates,  soldiers,  kings,  friends,  and  enemies,  for 

THOSE  WHO  ARJE  ALIVE,  AND  FOR  THOSE  WHO  HAVE  QUITTED  THEIR  BODIES?" 

St.  Basil, 

"  The  words  of  Isaiah, '  Through  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  is  the  land  burned,' 
(ix,  19,)  declare,  that  things  which  are  earthly  shall  be  made  the  food  of  a 
punishing  fire  to  the  end,  that  the  same  may  receive  favour  and  be  benefitted.' 
*  And  the  people  shall  be  as  fuel  of  the  fire.' — (Ibid.)  This  is  not  a  threat  of 
sxtermination,  but  it  denotes  expurgation,  according  to  the  expression  of  the 
apostle ;  *  If  any  man's  works  burn,  he  shall  suffer  loss ;  but  he  himself 
shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  fire.' — (1  Cor.  iii,  15.) — Com.  cap.  ix,  Isaiah, 
Tome  i,  p.  554. 

" '  Ana  the  light  of  Israel  shall  be  for  a  fire.' — (Isaiah  x,  17.)  The  operative 
powers  of  fire  are  chiefly  two — it  enlightens  and  it  burns.  The  first  is  cheerful 
and  pleasant — the  second  bitter  and  afflicting.  The  prophet  adds,  *and  he 
shall  sanctify  him  in  a  holy  fire,  and  consume  the  glory  of  his  forest  as  grass.' 
He  here  shows  the  nature  of  the  fire — it  enlightens  and  purifies.  But  how 
does  this  fire  purify,  if  it  consumes  ?  Truly,  since  our  God  is  called  *  a  con- 
suming fire,'  he  will  consume  the  wood,  and  what  vices  arise  from  matter 
which  adheres  to  the  soul  in  the  flesh,  not  in  the  spirft.  And  when  the  fire 
shall  have  consumed  all  the  wood  of  sin,  as  it  does  grass,  then  that  matter 
being  destroyed,  which  was  fuel  to  the  chastising  fire,  the  prophet  says, 
*The  burnt  mountains  shall  repose,  and  the  hills,  and  the  thick  forests,  and 
the  consuming  fire  shall  cease  that  fed  upon  them.' " — Ibid.  p.  563. 

I  do  not  envy  Mr.  Pope,  if  he  deem  his  private  judgment 
superior  to  the  texts  which  I  have  quoted,  and  to  the  judgment 
of  the  holy  Fathers  for  five  hundred  years.  I  defy  him  to  answer 
the  following  syllogistic  argument: — Either  the  Fathers,  at  the 
period  when  they  wrote,  published  that  which  was  the  established 
belief  of  the  Catholic  church,  or  they  did  not?  If  they  did 
publish  what  was  the  doctrine  in  their  time,  then  such  doctrine 
must  have  been  true,  since  the  church  is  acknowledged  on  all 
hands  to  have  been  pure  in  the  primitive  ages  of  Christianity  ? 
If  the  Fathers  published  that  which  was  not  the  established 
doctrine  of  the  church,  why  did  not  the  pure  church  protest,  and 
not  sanction  error  by  her  silence  ;  and  why  did  not  the  heretics 
protest,  against  whom  those  doctrines  were  advanced  ? 

Mr.  Pope  rose  and  said, — My  learned  adversary  commenced 
his  observations  by  addressing  himself  to  our  fears.  He  spoke 
of  the  dreadful  idea  of  being  hiprried  instantaneously,  either  into 
the  presence  of  Infinite  Holiness,  or  into  the  regions  of  eterna 
wo.  In  order  to  alleviate  those  fears,  he  proposes  to  us  the  fire  ol 


THE  DOCTUINE  OF  PURGATORY.  113 

purgatory;  of  that  purgatory,  in  which  the  church  of  Rome  tells 
us,  that  some  souls  have  licen  confined  for  more  than  a  thousand 
years.  My  friend  has  adverted  to  the  questions  which  he  pro- 
posed yesterday.  As  my  answers  are  already  before  th  *  public, 
who  can  decide  whether  they  are  satisfactory,  I  shall  not  follow 
Mr.  Maguire  through  his  devious  ramblings.  I  shall  merely 
observe,  that  he  has  this  morning  brought  forward  several  argu- 
ments, in  addition  to  those  which  he  advanced  yesterday,  employed 
by  infidels  in  their  denial  of  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures. How  did  Mr.  Maguire  act  yesterday?  Instead  of 
coming  in  a  manly  manner  to  the  real  question,  he  confined  me 
to  an  extreme  case.  He  asked  me,  by  what  mode  I  could 
convince  an  ignorant  man  that  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God  ? 
In  reply,  I  enquired  by  what  arguments  he  could  convince  him. 
You  have  heard  the  answers  of  both.  I  remarked,  that  in  de- 
monstrating to  the  illiterate  man,  that  the  scriptures  were  divine, 
I  would  appeal  only  to  the  internal  evidence,  which  commends 
itself  to  the  conscience,  as  having  the  impress  of  divine  truth 
engraven  upon  it.  I  again  ask,  did  not  Mr.  Maguire  as  well  as 
myself  appeal  to  the  private  judgment  of  the  individual  1  Mr. 
PrIaguire  would  refer  to  the  universal  consent  of  mankind !  I 
would  ask,  must  not  the  ignorant  man,  in  order  to  decide  whether 
this  universal  consent  exists  in  support  of  the  sacred  volume, 
must  he  not  wade  through  the  many  tomes  of  the  Fathers  1  I, 
therefore,  again  submit,  upon  whose  part  the  greater  difficulty 
exists,  in  convincing  the  illiterate  person  that  the  Bible  is  divine  ? 
In  order  to  show,  that,  while  the  eternal  punishment  of  sinjs  for- 
given, its  temporal  punishment  may  remain,  my  friend  has  referred 
us  to  the  cases  of  Adam  and  David.  I  readily  admit,  that  while 
the  Lord  forgives  the  sins  of  his  people,  he  frequently  chastens 
them  in  this  life,  when  they  act  inconsistently  with  their  profes- 
sion, and  cause  the  adversary  to  blaspheme.     The  Lord  says, 

"When  my  people  forsake  my  law,  I  will  visit  their  transgressions  with  a 
rod  ;  nevertheless  my  loving-kindness  will  I  not  utterly  take  from  him,  nor 
suffer  my  faithfulness  to  fall. — Psalm  Ixxxix,  30,  33. 

"  The  lord  chastens  those  whom  he  loves,  and  scourges  every  son  whom 
he  receives." — Heb.  xii,  6. 

But  I  would  ask,  because  God,  in  his  infinite  wisdom  sees  fit, 
when  his  people  depart  from  him,  to  visit  them  with  trials  in  this 
life,  does  this  fact  furnish  any  reason  for  supposing,  that  the 
Deity  will  extend  that  punishment  into  another  world  1  By  no 
means ;  there  is  not  the  slightest  ground  in  scripture  for  an 
opinion,  altogether  so  unworthy  of  the  character  of  God.  My 
friend  observes,  that  the  church  of  Rome  has  not  defined  the 
nature  of  the  fire  of  purgatory.  Cardinal  Bellarmine,  however, 
states,  that  the  damned,  and  the  souls  in  purgatory  are  tormented 

10* 


114  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

in  the  same  fire,  and  yet  Mr.  Maguire  has  informed  us,  that  the 
doctrine  of  purgatory  is  a  most  comfortable  doctrine !  !  The 
Reverend  Gentlen.an  has  quoted  the  fifth  of  Matthew  and  26th 
verse.  It  certain  .y  appears  to  me  strange,  that  a  doctrine  of 
such  importance  should,  in  the  very  first  instance  be  made  to  rest 
upon  a  parable,  the  very  explanation  of  which,  as  given  by  Mr. 
Maguire  himself,  proves  that  it  is  parabolic.  I  shall  now  examine 
itj  and  set  before  you  its  true  meaning.     The  passage  runs  thus, 

"Make  an  agreement  with  thy  adversary  quickly,  whilst  thou  art  in  the 
way  with  him,  lest  perhaps  the  adversary  deliver  thee  to  the  judge,  and  the 
judge  deliver  thee  to  the  officer,  and  thou  be  cast  into  prison.  Amen,  I  say 
imto  thee,  thou  shalt  not  go  out  from  thence,  till  thou  pay  the  last  farthing." 

I  argue  thus  ;  if  the  uttermost  farthing  be  paid,  then  are  the  sins 
of  the  individual  noi  pardoned ;  for  where  the  uttermost  farthing 
is  paid,  there  can  be  no  pardon  wanting;  and  on  the  contrary, 
if  the  sins  ^xe  pardoned.,  then  is  the  uttermost  farthing  not  paid. 
My  friend  talks  of  the  honesty  of  his  views  and  intentions, 
and  of  his  candour  in  giving  his  opinions :  I  trust,  that  I  can 
appeal  with  equal  confidence  to  the  integrity  of  mij  conduct. 
My  view  of  the  passage  before  us  is,  that  the  punishment,  of 
which  our  Saviour  speaks,  is  eternal  in  its  duration.  The  Re- 
deemer appears  desirous  of  showing  in  the  parable,  that  there 
can  be  no  hope  of  escape  from  that  place,  which  he  designates 
"  prison,"  to  that  individual  who  dies  in  the  rejection  of  the 
gospel.  Several  considerations  are  fitted  to  show  us,  that  the 
punishment  of  which  the  Saviour  speaks,  is  everlasting.  The 
glory  of  God  is  infinite  ;  our  debt,  if  not  remitted,  infinite ;  the 
sinfulness  of  sin,  infinite.  Even  according  to  the  standard  of 
this  world,  an  ofience  is  considered  to  rise  in  magnitude,  in 
proportion  to  the  dignity  of  the  individual  against  whom  it  is 
committed ;  a  libel  upon  the  character  of  a  private  person,  is 
treason  when  committed  against  a  sovereign.  The  God  against 
whom  we  have  rebelled,  is  King  of  Kings,  and  Lord  of  Lords  ; 
our  sins,  therefore,  being  committed  against  infinite  Majesty, 
unless  blotted  out  in  the  atoning  blood  of  Jesus,  must  for  ever 
remain  against  us,  and  call  down  an  interminable  retribution. 
I  shall  quote  a  passage  from  a  note  in  the  Douay  Bible,  which 
fully  justifies  the  view  that  I  have  taken  of  the  expression,  ^^  until 
thou  hast  paid,"  which  implies  that  it  shall  never  he  paid.  The 
comment  is  on  Matt,  i,  25. 

"  *  Till  she  brought  forth  her  first-born  son.' — From  these  words,  Helvidius 
and  others  heretics  most  impiously  inferred,  that  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary  had 
other  children  besides  Christ.  But  St.  Jerome  shows,  by  divers  examples, 
that  this  expression  of  the  Evangelist  was  a  manner  of  speaking  usual  among 
the  Hebrews,  to  denote  by  the  word  until,  only  what  is  done,  without  any  r«- 
gard  to  the  future;  Thus,  it  is  said.  Gen.  viii,  6,  7,  That  J<*oah  sent  forth  a 
raven,  which  went  forth,  and  did  not  return,  until  the  waters  were  dried  upon 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  113 

the  earth;  that  is,  did  not  return  any  more.  Also,  in  Isaiah,  xlvi,  4,  God 
Bays,  *  /  am  till  you  grow  oW  Who  dare  infer,  that  God  should  then  cease 
to  be  ?  Also,  in  the  first  book  of  Maccabees,  verse  54 :  '  Jlnd  they  went  up 
to  Mount  Siony  wii,n  joy  and  gladness,  and  offered  holocausts,  because  not  one  of 
them  was  slain,  till  they  had  returned  in  peace.''  That  is,  not  one  was  slain 
before  or  after  they  had  returned.  God  saith  to  his  divine  Son,  *  Sit  on  my 
right  hand,  till  I  make  thy  enemies  thy  fotstooV  Shall  he  sit  no  longer  after 
his  enemies  are  subdued  ?     Yea,  and  for  all  eternity ! !" 

Mr.  Maguire  referred  to  the  passage  in  Matt,  xii,  32. 

"Whosoever  shall  speak  a  vv^ord  against  the  Son  of  Man,  it  shall  be  for* 
given  him  ;  but  he  that  shall  speak  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be 
forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world,  nor  in  the  world  to  come." 

Now,  I  beg  to  observe,  that  the  phrase,  "  this  world,"  and 
"  the  world  to  come,"  was  current  among  the  Jews,  and  denoted 
time  in  general.  The  Redeemer,  I  maintain,  signified  thereby, 
that  the  sin  should  never  be  forgiven.  We  should  compare 
scripture  with  scripture,  spiritual  things  with  spiritual  things,  one 
passage  with  another.  Thus  in  Mark  iii,  29,  and  Luke  xii,  10, 
we  find  the  correspondent  passages  thus  expressed  : 

"But  he  that  shall  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  shall  never  havj 
forgiveness,  but  shall  be  guilty  of  an  everlasting  sin.  And  whosoever  speak- 
eth  a  word  against  the  Son  of  Man,  it  shall  be  forgiven  him ;  but  to  him  that 
shall  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven." 

The  Jews  expected  under  the  Messiah  a  fuller  dispensation  of 
pardon  than  under  the  Mosaic  economy.  Our  Lord  here  informs 
them  of  a  sin,  which,  even  under  the  privileges  of  the  Christian 
dispensations,  (see  Heb.  x,  28,  29,)  is  evidently,  according  to 
the  text,  unpardonable.  The  church  of  Rome  has  made  an 
unhappy  distinction  between  the  greatness  of  one  sin  and  another 
in  the  sight  of  God.  It  should  be  remembered,  that  "he  who 
offendeth  in  one  point,"  is  stated  by  St.  James,  "  to  be  guilty 
ofall."— xi,  10. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  observed,  that  nothing  unclean  entereth  into 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Granted  ;  but  I  maintain,  that  the  true 
purgatory  is  the  fountain  which  has  been  opened  for  sin  and  for 
uncleanness,  in  the  atoning  blood  of  Jesus.  My  opponent  has 
referred  to  the  third  chapter  of  the  first  Corinthians.  We  can 
without  difficulty  prove,  that  this  passage  does  not  support 
purgatory.  When  it  is  said,  that  "  the  fire  shall  try  every  man's 
work  ;"  it  is  manifest  that  the  fire  is  'probatory^  and  not  purga^ 
torial.  There  is  not  a  being  in  existence  who  does  not  commit 
those  sins,  for  which,  according  to  Mr.  Maguire,  men  must  go 
through  the  fire  of  purgatory.     Again — it  is  said, 

"  Every  man's  work  shall  be  made  manifest  of  what  sort  it  is." 

Whence  it  is  evident,  that  the  works  of  the  good  and  of  the  evii 
alike  must  endure  the  trying  process.  Does  not  this  fact  show^ 
that  the  fire  is  a  fire  of  trial,  not  of  purgation. 


116  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATOHF. 

Further — it  is  the  work^  the  doctrine  of  the  individual,  w  fiich 
is  to  be  tried  in  this  fire,  and  not  his  soul.  The  minister  of  the 
gospel  is  not  to  add  to  its  fundamental  truths,  but  to  preach  it  in 
all  its  native  simplicity ;  while  the  man  who  corrupts  it  with 
false  philosophy,  and  builds  upon  it  wood,  hay,  stubble,  if  he 
holds  the  head  Christ  Jesus,  will  be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  fire  ;  that 
is,  with  extreme  difi[iculty. 

My  friend  referred  to  the  first  of  Peter,  iii,  19,  20. 

"Christ  also  died  once  for  our  sins,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  migl  t 
offer  us  to  God,  being  put  to  death  indeed  in  the  flesh,  but  enhvened  in  the 
spirit,  in  which  also  coming,  he  preached  to  those  spirits  which  had  been 
some  time  incredulous,  when  they  awaited  for  the  patience  of  God,  in  the 
days  of  Noe,  when  the  ark  was  building,  wherein  a  few,  that  is  eight  souls, 
were  saved  by  water." — Douay  Bible. 

Mr.  Maguire  is  aware,  that  according  to  the  church  of  Rome, 
only  two  descriptions  of  persons  go  to  purgatory  ;  those  who  die 
in  venial  sins,  or  those  who  die  absolved  from  the  guilt  of  mortal 
sin.  In  Roman  Catholic  catechisms,  mortal  sins  are  enumerated. 
The  character  of  those  persons  who  perished  in  the  flood,  as 
described  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  proves  that  they  died  in 
mortal  sin : 

"God  seeing  that  the  wickedness  of  men  was  great  on  the  earth,  and  that 
all  the  thoughts  of  their  hearts  were  bent  upon  evil  at  all  times,  it  repented 
him  that  he  had  made  man  on  the  earth." — vi,  5. 

Again: — "The  earth  was  corrupted  before  God,  and  was  filled  with  ini-« 
quity,  and  when  God  had  seen  that  the  earth  was  corrupted,  for  all  flesh  had 
corrupted  its  way  upon  the  earth,  he  said  to  Noe,  *  The  end  of  all  flesh  is 
come  before  me ;  the  earth  is  filled  with  iniquity  through  them,  and  I  will 
destroy  them  with  the  earth.'  " — 1 1,  12,  13,  and  14  verses. 

My  opponent  cannot  say  that  they  received  absolution ;  they 
despised  Noah,  a  preacher  of  righteousness,  and  were  over- 
whelmed in  the  flood,  the  guilt  of  mortal  sin  being  fixed  upon 
their  heads. 

Mr.  Maguire  says,  Christ  went  and  released  those  people  out 
of  prison.  Look  to  the  text.  Did  we  even  suppose  that  the 
passage  referred  to  purgatory;  it  is  merely  said,  that  He  preached 
to  the  spirits,  but  there  is  no  mention  whatsoever  made  of  their 
having  been  delivered.  My  view  of  the  passage  is  this  :  Christ 
was  raised  from  the  dead  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in 
which  spirit  he  preached  to  the  Antediluvians ;  to  the  spirits 
ev  (foXaxi,  "  in  prison ;"  (not  which  ivere  in  prison,  as  the  Douay 
Bible  renders  the  expression,)  either  in  the  spiritual  prison  ot 
ungodliness,  when  Noah  preached,  or  else  in  the  prison  of  hell, 
when  Peter  wrote.  Christ,  through  the  instrumentality  of  Noah, 
preached  before  the  flood.  The  Holy  Spirit,  though  not  so 
abundantly  vouchsafed  till  the  Christian  dispensation,  was  always 
with  the  church  of  God.  The  view  of  the  passage  entertained  by 
an  authority  which  Mr.  Maguire  respects,  coincides  with  mine 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY.  117 

The  venerable  Bede,  who  lived  more  than  one  thousand  years 
ago,  gives  us  the  opinion  of  an  early  Father,  perhaps  Athanasius, 
on  this  portion  of  scripture. 

"He  who  in  our  time?,  coming  in  the  flesh,  preached  the  way  of  life  to  the 
world,  even  He  himself  also  came  before  the  flood,  and  preached  to  them  who 
were  then  unbelieving,  and  lived  carnally  ;  for  even  he,  by  his  Holy  Spirit, 
was  in  Noah,  and  in  the  rest  of  the  holy  men  which  were  at  that  time,  and 
by  their  good  conversation  preached  to  the  wicked  men  of  that  age,  that  they 
might  be  converted  to  better  manners." — Ful.  in  Loco.  sec.  ii,  p.  806. 

My  friend  refers  to  the  second  of  Maccabees  twelfth  chapter. 
I  have  already  shown  that  this  book  is  not  canonical.  I  shall 
again  refer  to  the  fourteenth  chapter,  41st  and  42d,  verse  in  which 
it  will  be  seen,  that  suicide  is  commended. 

**  Now,  as  the  multitude  sought  to  rush  into  the  house,  and  to  break  open 
the  door,  and  set  fire  to  it,  when  he  was  ready  to  be  taken,  he  struck  himself 
with  his  swordj  choosing  to  die  nobly,  rather  than  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
wicked." 

Is  the  eulogy  of  such  conduct  in  consistency  with  the  spirit 
and  precepts  of  the  word  of  God  ?  Consult  another  of  the 
Apocryphal  books,  and  you  will  find  one  Apocryphal  book  con- 
tradicting another.  In  the  third  chapter  of  Wisdom  1st  to  4th 
verses,  we  read, — 

"  But  the  souls  of  the  just  are  in  the  hands  of  God,  and  the  torment  of  death 
3hall  not  touch  them  ;  and  their  departure  was  taken  for  misery,  and  their 
^oing  away  from  us  for  utter  destruction  ;  but  they  die  in  peace.  And  though 
in  the  sight  of  men  they  sufl?ered  torments,  their  hope  is  full  of  immortality." 

Would  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Wisdom  have  intimated,  that 
their  death  wrs  falsely  taken  for  misery,  if  they  must  first  pass 
through  the  torments  of  a  purgatory  ?  Would  he  have  said,  that 
they  are  in  peace  ?  Here  is  Wisdom  against  the  second  book  of 
Maccabees.  I  would  ask,  did  the  individuals  mentioned  in  the 
twelfth  of  Maccabees,  for  whom  prayers  were  made,  die  in 
mortal  sin  1  I  hope  that  my  friend  allows,  that  idolatry  is  a 
mortal  sin  ;  they  were  guilty  of  it. 

"  They  found  under  the  coats  of  the  slain,  some  of  the  donaries  of  the  idols 
of  Jamnia,  which  the  law  forbiddeth  to  the  Jews,  so  that  all  plainly  saw,  that 
for  this  cause  they  were  slain." — 40. 

Thus,  regarding  the  Apocrypha,  merely  as  an  historical  rela 
lion,  and  meeting  my  learned  antagonist  on  this  ground,  as  they 
contain  palpable  contradictions,  why  should  they  be  made  the 
foundation  for  even  an  historical  truth.  I  must,  however,  advert 
to  other  matters.  I  am  ready  to  prove  the  genuineness,  authen- 
ticity, and  canonicity  of  the  scriptures,  if  the  question  be  pro- 
posed to  me  in  a  manner  becriming  a  scholar;  but  I  have  been 
shut  up,  as  is  evident,  to  an  extreme  case,  that  of  the  poor 
ignorant   peasant.      My   friend   has  quoted   largeiv   from   tlie 


118  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

Fathers.  I  beg  to  remark,  that  M.  Trevern,  lately  promoted 
from  the  bishopric  of  Aire  to  that  of  Strasburgh,  (I  need  not 
add,  a  Roman  Catholic  divine)  honestly  admits,  that  Jesus 
Christ  has  communicated  no  revelation  to  us  concerning  purga- 
tory, and  observes — 

"  Had  it  been  necessary  for  us  to  be  instructed  in  such  questions,  Jesus 
would  doubtless  reveal  the  knowledge  of  them ;  he  has  not  done  so  ;  we 
can,  therefore,  only  form  conjectures  on  the  subject,  more  or  less  probable." — - 
Discuss.  Amic.  Vol.  ii,  p.  242. 

The  celebrated  Roman  Catholic  Bishop  Fisher  inform  us,, 
that— 

"In  the  ancient  Fathers,  there  is  either  none  at  all,  or  very  rare  mention 
cf  a  purgatory:  that  by  the  Grecians  it  is  not  believed  to  this  day;  that  the 
Latins,  not  all  at  once,  but  by  little  and  little,  received  it,  "  pedetentim,"  step 
by  step  ;  and  that  purgatory  being  so  lately  known,  it  is  not  to  be  marvelled, 
that  in  the  first  times  of  the  church  there  was  no  use  of  Indulgences,  seeing 
these  had  their  beginning,  after  that  men  for  a  while  had  been  affrighted  with 
the  torments  of  purgatory. ^^ — Roffens  Assert.  Lutheran  Confutat.  Artie.  18. 

Cardinal  Cajetan  observes — 

"  If  we  could  have  any  cert  air  ty  concerning  the  origin  of  indulgences,  it 
would  help  us  much  in  the  disquisition  of  the  truth  of  purgatory;  but  we 

HAVE  NOT  BY  WRITING  ANT  AUTHORITY,  EITHER  OF  THE  HOLT  SCRIPTURES, 
OR  ANCIENT  DOCTORS,  GREEK  OR  LATIN,  WHICH  AFFORDS  US  ANY  KNOWLEDGE 

THEREOF." — Cap.  2,  de  Indulg. 

And  Alphonsus  de  Castro  writes, 

^"Many  things  are  known  to  us,  of  which  the  ancients  were  altogether  igno- 
rant,  as  purgatory,  indulgences,^^  <^c, — Adv.  Hoeor.  L.  12,  Tit.  Purg.  f.  258. 

We  have  Cyprian,  Tertullian,  and  various  other  quotationa 
from  the  Fathers,  overturning  those  which  have  been  adduced 
by  my  friend,  did  time  permit  me  to  repeat  them.  But  I  would 
briefly  ask,  why  did  Polycarp  specially  treat  on  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead,  and  yet  wholly  omit  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  1 
(Epist.  ad  Philip.  §  11,  v,  ii.)  Why  did  Ignatius  assert,  that 
only  two  states  in  the  future  world,  a  state  of  death,  and  a  state 
of  life,  are  set  before  us  ;  so  that  every  one  who  dies,  goes  to 
his  own  proper  place  ;  and  why  did  he  not  make  the  slightest 
allusion  to  a  purgatory,  if  he  believed  in  it  ? — (Ep.  ad  Magnes. 
§  V.)  Why  did  Athenagaras  write  a  treatise  on  the  Resurrec- 
tion of  the  Dead,  and  yet  make  no  mention  of  purgatory  ? — De 
Resurr.  Mort.  in  Oper.  pp.  143 — 219.     Cyprian  says— 

"  When  once  we  have  departed  hence,  there  is  no  longer  any  place  for 
repentance — no  longer  any  effectiveness  of  satisfaction.  Here  life  is  either  lost 
or  held  j  here  we  may  provide  for  our  eternal  salvation  by  the  worship  of  God 
and  the  fruitfulness  of  faith.  Let  not  any  one  be  retarded,  either  by  sins  or 
by  length  of  years,  from  attaining  to  salvation.  ***** 
To  him  who  believes,  a  salutary  indulgence  is  granted  from  the  Divine  pity ; 
and  immediately  afte^'  death  he  passes  to  a  blessed  immortality.^^ — Cyprian  ad 
Demetrian,  p.  196. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY.         119 

Tertullian  counts  it  injurious  to  Christ  to  hold  that  such  as 
are  called  home  by  him,  are  in  a  state  to  be  pitied.     He  says,— 

"  We  wrong  Christ,  when  we  do  not  with  equanimity  hear  of  those  who  are 
summoned  hence  by  him,  as  if  they  were  to  be  pitied." — Lib.  de  Patient,  c.  9. 

Mr.  Maguire. — You  will  easily  perceive,  gentlemen,  that 
this  is  an  important  discussion.  My  adversary  has  endeavoured 
to  explain  away  some  of  the  texts — I  shall  only  remark,  that 
with  regard  to  these  texts,  he  may  have  his  private  judgment, 
and  I  have  mine.  There  are  two  or  three  which  we  never  shall 
give  up — in  respect  to  the  others,  we  shall  not  relinquish  the 
doctrine  of  the  church  for  the  first  ages,  and  adopt  the  opinion 
of  Mr.  Pope.  He  says,  that  a  man  will  be  detained  in  purga- 
tory for  one  thousand  years — that  is  not  the  doctrine  of  the 
Catholic  church,  and  I  never  said  it  was — it  is  absurd  in  this 
manner  to  meet  direct  arguments  by  unfounded  suppositions. 
The  church  has  pronounced  no  decision  as  to  the  length  of  time 
that  souls  may  be  detained  in  purgatory.  If  a  soul  remain  there 
but  for  two  minutes,  the  doctrine  is  as  fully  established,  as  if  it 
remained  there  for  two  thousand  years.  My  arguments  are 
founded  upon  scripture  and  reason,  and  upon  the  authority  of 
ihe  universal  church. 

Mr.  Pope  has  asserted,  that  a  Roman  Catholic,  in  making  an 
act  of  faith,  builds  it  upon  private  judgment. — The  Catholic  has 
only  to  exercise  his  private  judgment  upon  the  scriptural  proofs 
of  the  authority  of  the  church.  That  once  established,  the 
Catholic  is  enabled  to  make  an  act  of  faith  upon  Divine  authority 
— the  Protestant  never  can  make  an  act  of  faith  until  he  clears 
up  all  the  sophistries  and  cavillings  of  the  deists.  The  Catholic 
once  admitting  the  authority  of  the  church,  rests  satisfied — he 
laughs  to  scorn  the  objections  of  the  infidel,  and  founds  his  faith 
upon  the  immoveable  word  of  Christ.  We  exercise  our  private 
judgment  to  ascertain  the  authority  of  the  church.  But  the 
moment  we  have  that  fact  satisfactorily  established,  all  our  doubts 
and  difficulties  vanish.  Mr.  Pope  then,  all  this  while  has  been 
building  castles  in  the  air,  and  conjuring  up  the  phantoms  of  his 
own  imagination,  for  the  mere  purpose  of  laying  them  again. 
Similar  arguments,  to  those  which  he  has  advanced,  were  urged 
by  Porphyry,  and  Julian  the  apostate — by  Rousseau,  Diderot, 
and  Yoltaire,  who  set  their  own  private  judgments  against  the 
authority  of  the  Catholic  church,  and  some  of  whom,  on  their 
death-beds,  sought  to  be  reconciled  to  her  communion.  Mr. 
Pope  has  enlarged  upon  the  wonderful  blessing  of  being  justified 
through  the  merits  of  Christ.  I  trust,  that  I  am  a  Christian  from 
conviction,  and  although  the  profession  of  it  is  not  as  frequently 
on  my  lips  as  on  those  of  others,  I  hope  to  be  justified  through 


120  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

the  merits  of  Christ.  I  allow  no  merits  but  his.  He  is  the 
source  aud  fountain  of  all  merit.  That  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
Catholic  Chuich,  and  it  is  a  point  of  our  doctrine,  regarding 
which  Protestants  are  much  misinformed.  We  do  admit,  that 
the  saints  can  beseech  Christ,  and  interfere  by  their  prayers  in 
our  behalf — but  we  deny  that  they  have  any  merits  of  their  own 
— they  have  none,  except  through  the  Redeemer,  Jesus  Christ — 
he  is  the  Divinity — the  spring — the  source  whence  every  thing 
must  come.  It  was  through  his  infinite  merits  he  saved  the  world. 
Does  Mr.  Pope,  in  the  hearing  of  bishops,  dare  to  stay  the 
arm  of  divine  and  omnipotent  mercy,  in  his  explanation  of  the 
sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost?  Are  we  not  told,  that  whoever 
invokes  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved  ?  Is  it  impossible 
that  a  man  who  has  committed  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost, 
who  has  denied  the  known  truth,  may  not,  after  the  revolution  of 
sixty  years,  suppose,  repent  sincerely  of  his  sins,  obtain  the  par- 
don of  a  merciful  God,  and  be  saved  ?  Shall  it  be  said,  that  the 
gates  of  heaven  would  be  closed  against  a  truly  repentant  sinner? 
Tertullian  was  condemned  for  asserting,  that  the  church  had  not 
the  power  to  absolve  from  the  sin  of  apostacy,  and  from  the  sin 
against  the  Holy  Ghost.  Tertullian  was  excluded  from  the 
Catholic  church  in  the  second  century,  because  he  promulgated 
such  a  doctrine.  Mr.  Pope  says,  that  by  paying  the  last  far- 
thing, is  meant  paying  in  this  world. 

[Mr.  Pope.— What  I  stated  was,  that  if  sins  be  forgiven  in 
purgatory,  the  uttermost  farthing  cannot  be  'paid  there — if  the 
uttermost  farthing  he  paid,  sins  cannot  he  forgiven  in  purgatory.] 

Mr.  Maguire. — You  evidently  say  that  the  payment  of  the 
uttermost  farthing  is  confined  to  this  world.  By  what  r^ht  can 
you  deny  that  it  may  not  also  be  paid  in  purgatory  ?  If  it  be 
paid  in  purgatory,  then  sins  are  forgiven  there.  If  it  be  paid  m 
this  world,  then  souls  go  direct  to  heaven,  which  I  never  denied 
The  necessity  of  purgatory  to  all,  forms  no  portion  of  the  beliel 
of  the  Catholic  church.  Thousands  may  go  to  heaven  without 
going  through  purgatory.  But  if  a  man  should  die  in  venial  sin, 
God  is  too  merciful  to  consign  his  soul  to  eternal  damnation. 
He  will  purify  him,  and  take  him  to  himself.  God,  in  his  mercy 
«vill  listen  to  the  prayers  of  the  faithful  on  earth,  for  those  who 
are  placed  in  such  circumstances.  The  Catholic  church,  there- 
fore, receives  the  article  of  the  communion  of  saints.  I  shall 
not  attempt  to  force  it  upon  Protestants — but  let  them  look  i6 
and  examine  it  in  the'  creed. 

My  learned  friend,  Mr.  Pope,  has  frequently  referred  to  the 
merits  of  Christ's  blood.     No  one  is  more  ready  to  plead  tho 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY  121 

efh^-acy  of  the  Redeemer's  blood  than  I  am  ;  bul  instead  cf 
introducing  its  glorious  merits  every  moment  in  a  public  discus- 
sion, I  reserve  it  for  more  solemn  occasions.  When  I  behold 
a  sinner  afraid  to  pray,  I  draw  his  attention  to  the  infinite  mercy 
of  God  ;  and  when  the  unfortunate  man,  overwhelmed  with  the 
weight  of  his  sins,  is  on  the  point  of  sinking  into  despair,  I 
awaken  his  hopes,  and  arouse  him  to  a  sense  of  his  duty,  by 
pointing  to  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  shed  for  the  redemption  of 
man.  Mr.  Pope  says,  that  the  fire  mentioned  in  scripture  is 
merely  probationary.  I  am  at  a  loss  to  know  in  that  case  what 
our  Divine  Lord  meant  by  casting  into  prison  until  the  uttermost 
farthing  should  be  paid,  which  had  not  been  remitted  "  while  in 
the  way,"  that  is,  in  this  life,  but  which  should  be  discharged 
"  in  the  prison,"  that  is,  in  the  next  life.  A  confusion  of  ideas 
seemed  to  pervade  the  mind  of  my  friend  while  addressing  him- 
self to  this  point.  To  the  man  who  sincerely  seeks  the  truth, 
the  grace  of  God  is  given  to  guide  and  to  direct  him.  But  the 
influence  of  grace  would  not  have  led  my  friend  into  the 
erroneous  interpretation  which  he  endeavoured  to  affix  to  this 
passage  of  the  scriptures. 

Mr.  Pope  has  stated  correctly  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic 
church,  with  respect  to  the  persons  who  go  to  purgatory. 
The  doctrine  of  the  CathoHc  church  is  this  : — A.  man  who  has 
committed  sin,  but  who  has  received  absolution — whose  heart  is 
penetrated  with  a  sincere  contrition  for  his  sins — who  has  firmly 
determined  never  more  to  offend,  and  is  resolved  to  make  resti- 
tution to  God  and  to  his  neighbor, — such  a  man  may  go  to 
heaven  directly  after  his  death.  But  those  who  have  altogether 
wasted  their  time  here — who  have  neglected  to  perform  the 
necessary  duties  in  the  way  of  co-operation  for  the  pardon  which 
they  have  obtained  through  the  merits  of  Christ — must  be  purified 
in  a  third  place  before  they  can  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
Mr.  Pope  has  said,  that  Christ  preached  to  those  who  were  in 
prison,  but  did  not  release  them.  I  have  heard  the  assertion 
with  astonishment.  Surely,  if  Christ  went  to  preach,  he  would 
hot  lose  the  effect  of  his  mission.  Christ  went  to  announce  to 
the  spirits  in  prison  the  glad  tidings  of  redemption,  to  make 
'known  to  them  his  victory  over  sin  and  death,  and  to  bring  them 
with  him  to  that  paradise  which  he  had  promised  to  the  thief 
upon  the  cross.  Where  Christ  is,  there  is  paradise.  The  prison 
was  paradise  while  Christ  was  there.  With  regard  to  the  private 
opinions  of  theologians,  which  Mr.  Pope  has  cited  as  making 
against  purgatory — even  if  they  did  so,  (and  I  trust  his  quota- 
tions are  not  unfairly  taken)  I  shall  merely  say,  that  I  am  now 
stating  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church.  Mr.  Pope  has 
quoted  the  book  of  Wisdom.,  as  if  it  contradicted'  the  book  of 

11 


122  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORI. 

Maccabees.  I  shall  just  read  to  you  the  entire  passage  referred 
to,  and  you  will  judge  whether  it  is  at  all  contradictory  to  the 
book  of  Maccabees  : 

"  But  the  souls  of  the  just  are  in  the  hand  of  God,  and  the  torment  of  death 
shall  not  touch  them.  In  the  sight  of  the  unwise  they  seemed  to  die,  and 
their  departure  was  taken  for  misery,  and  their  going  away  for  utter  destruc- 
tion ;  but  they  are  in  peace.  And  though  in  the  sight  of  men  they  suffered 
torments,  their  hope  is  full  of  immortally." — iii,  1 — 4. 

Here  the  book  of  Wisdom  merely  states  that  the  souls  of  he 
just  go  to  glory — and  so  they  shall.  Does  that  contradict  the 
doctrine  of  purgatory  1  Thousands  may  go  to  heaven  without 
going  to  purgatory — and  those  who  go  there,  are  only  on  their 
passage  to  salvation — so  there  is  here  no  contradiction  whatever. 

Mr.  Pope  has  quoted  a  passage  from  the  2d  book  of  Macca- 
bees, as  if  it  sanctioned  murder.  It  merely  eulogizes  the  soldiers 
who  died  bravely  in  the  defence  of  their  country.  Is  it  murder 
the  writer  recommends,  when  he  praises  Judas  for  fighting 
nobly?  With  regard  to  what  Mr.  Pope  said  respecting  the 
idols  ;  I  grant  that  those  who  were  slain  had  committed  mortal 
sin,  but  was  it  impossible  for  them  to  make  an  act  of  sincere 
contrition  before  they  expired,  or  in  the  paroxysms  of  death,  to 
look  to  the  blood  of  the  long  expected  Jesus  1  Was  it  not  lawful 
on  that  supposition,  for  Judas  Maccabeus,  who  was  a  charitable 
man,  i^  offer  up  prayers  for  their  repose  1  Granting  that  a 
third  place  did  exist,  was  his  conduct  inconsistent  with  that 
doctrine  ?  It  is  quite  impossible  for  Mr.  Pope  to  prove  that  the 
book  of  Maccabees  is  not  canonical.  He  has  quoted  Bishop 
Fisher  against  me  ;  It  would  indeed  appear  extraordinary  if 
Bishop  Fisher,  who  died  a  martyr  for  the  Catholic  religion — who 
was  put  to  death  by  Henry  YIII,  along  with  the  chancellor,  Sii 
Thomas  Moore,  because  he  would  not  deny  the  Pope's  supre- 
macy— should  state  what  was  contrary  to  the  universally  acknow- 
ledged doctrine  of  the  church.  I  shall  not  follow  the  example 
of  Mr.  Pope,  and  volunteer  unmanly  allusions  tn  the  established 
church  of  England.  I  am  not  leagued  with  Ihose  pretended 
friends  who  conspire  her  overthrow.  I  would  not  conspire  to 
destroy  even  the  temporalities  of  that  church.  In  her  spiritual 
and  apostolic  claims,  she  comes  nearest  to  our  own. 

Mr.  Pope  has  asked  me,  why  did  not  Polycarp,  who  was  one 
of  the  early  Fathers,  speak  of  purgatory  1  This  is  a  curious 
negative  argument.  I  might  as  well  conclude,  that  because  a 
certain  historian  has  not  mentioned  a  certain  fact,  therefore  it 
never  occurred — though  vouched  for  by  several  other  credible 
and  contemporary  narrators.  There  is  no  mention  made  by 
any  early  historians  (the  Christian  writers  excepted)  of  the 
miracles  of*  Christ,  unless  in  one  passage  in  Josephus.     Thai 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORF.  123 

|)dssage  has  been  exploded  by  critics  as  not  authentic  ; — am  I, 
tiien,  from  such  premises,  to  conclude  that  these  miracles  never 
were  performed  ? 

I  shall  now  read  to  you  the  passages  from  the  Fathers,  in 
reference  to  the  doctrine  which  forms  the  subject  of  discussion 
this  day. 

Tertullian  says 

"  We  have  oblations  for  the  dead  in  the  anniversary  day." 

And  to  widowers  he  writes, 

"  Reflect  for  whose  soul  you  pray — for  whom  you  make  annual  oblations.' 

St.  Ephrem  of  Edessa,  in  a  work  entitled  his  Testament 
thus  proceeds  : 

"  My  brethren  come  to  me,  and  prepare  me  for  my  departure,  for  mj 
strength  is  wholly  gone.  Go  along  with  me  in  psahns,  and  in  your  prayers  j 
and  please  constantly  to  make  oblations  for  me  (irpoaipopas.)  When  th^ 
thirtieth  day  shall  be  completed  then  remember  me;  for  the  dead  ark 
HELPED  BY  THE  OFFERINGS  OF  THE  LiviNG.  Now  Hstcn  with  patience  to 
what  I  shall  mention  from  the  Scriptures.  Moses  bestowed  blessings  on 
Reuben  after  the  third  generation. — (Deut.  xxxiii,  6.)  But  if  the  dead  are 
not  aided,  why  was  he  blessed  ?  Again,  if  they  be  insensible,  hear  what  the 
Apostle  says,  *  If  the  dead  rise  not  again  at  all,  why  are  they  then  baptized 
for  them.' — (I  Cor.  xv,  29.)  If,  also,  the  sons  of  Mathias  (2d  Mace,  xii,) 
who  celebrated  their  feasts  in  figure  only,  could  cleanse  those  from  guilt,  by 
their  offerings  who  fell  in  battle,  how  much  more  so  shall  the  priests  of  Christ 
aid  the  dead  by  their  oblations  and  prayers." — In  Testament  tome  iii,  p. 
294,  Edit.  Vossil.  p.  37 1,  Edit.  Oxonii. 

St.  Cyril,  of  Jerusalem: 

"  Then  (during  service)  we  pray  for  the  holy  Fathers  and  bishops  that  are 
dead ;  and  in  short  for  all  those  who  are  departed  this  life,  in  our  communion, 
believing  that  their  souls  receive  very  great  relief  by  the  prayers  that  are  offer- 
ed for  them,  while  the  holy  and  tremenduous  victim  lies  upon  the  altar.  This 
we  will  shew  you  by  an  example.  For  I  know  there  are  many  who  say, 
*  What  good  can  it  do  a  soul  which  is  departed  out  of  this  life,  whether  with 
sins  or  without  them,  to  be  remembered  in  this  sacrifice?'  But  tell  me,  I 
pray  you,  if  a  king  had  sent  into  banishment  some  persons  that  had  offended 
nim,  and  their  friends  should  present  him  with  a  crown  of  immense  price,  to 
appease  his  anger,  might  not  the  king  on  that  account,  shew  some  favor  to 
the  guilty  persons  ?  So  do  we  address  our  prayers  to  God  for  those  that  are 
dead,  though  they  were  sinners ;  not  by  presenting  to  him  a  crown,  but  by 
offering  up  to  him  Christ,  who  was  sacrificed  for  our  sins,  that  so  he,  who  is 
so  merciful  and  good,  may  become  gracious  to  them  as  well  as  to  us." — Mysti- 
gog.  Cat  pp.  297,  298. 

The  fourth  council  of  Carthage,  canon  79,  tome  ii,  p.  1206. 
Also,  the  29th  canon  of  the  preceding  council  of  Carthage,  ibi- 
dem, p.  1171  : 

"Penitents  who  have  carefully  submitted  eo  the  laws  of  the  heads  of  the 
church,  should  they  accidentally  die  on  the  road,  or  by  sea,  where  no  assis- 
tance could  be  given,  should  be  renumbered  in  the  prayers  and  offerings  of  thi 
faUhfui:' 

St.  Gregory  of  Nysa,  (Orat.  pro  defunctis.  T.  ii,  p.  1066 
7,  8.)  says — 


124  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

"In  order  that  a  man  might  be  left  to  the  dignity  of  free  will,  and  evil  at 
the  same  time  be  taken  from  him,  Divine  will  thus  devised  :  He  allows  him  to 
remain  subject  to  what  himself  has  cho»en,  that  having  tasted  of  the  evil  which 
he  desired,  and  learned  by  experience  how  bad  an  exchange  has  been  made, 
he  might  again  feel  an  ardent  wish  to  lay  down  the  load  of  those  vices  and 
inainations  which  are  contrary  to  reason;  and  thus,  in  this  life  being  renova- 
ted by  prayers  and  the  pursuit  of  wisdom,  or  in  the  next  being  expiated  by 
the  purging  fire,  he  might  recover  the  state  of  happiness  which  he  had  lost. 
Man,  otherwise,  must  inchne  to  that  side  to  which  his  passions  tend.  But 
when  he  has  quitted  his  body,  and  the  difference  between  virtue  and  vice  is 
known,  he  cannot  be  admitted  to  approach  the  Divinity  till  the  purging  fire 
shall  have  expiated  the  stains  with  wnich  his  soul  was  infected.  That  same 
fire  in  others  will  cancel  the  corruption  of  matter  and  the  propensity  to  evil." 

St.  Ambrose  having,  in  the  preceding  part  of  the  chapter, 
spoken  of  the  effect  of  penal  fire  on  what  the  Apostle  calls  silver 
and  gold,  and  hay  and  stubble,  thus  concludes ; 

"  '  We  must  all  appear  before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ,  that  every  one 
may  recei/e  the  proper  things  of  the  body,  according  as  he  hath  done,  whether 
it  be  good,  or  whether  it  be  evil.' — (2  Cor.  v.  10.)  Take  care  that  you  carry 
not  with  you  to  the  judgment  of  God,  either  wood  or  stubble  which  the  fire-may 
consume.  Take  care  lest,  having  one  of  the  things  that  may  be  approved, 
you  at  the  same  time  have  much  that  may  give  offence.  '  If  any  man's  works 
burn  he  shall  suffer  loss ;  but  he  himself  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  fire.' 
(1  Cor.  iii.  15.)  Whence  it  may  be  collected,  that  the  same  man  is  saved  in 
part,  and  condemned  in  part,  {salvatur  ex  parte,  et  condemnatur  ex  -parte.) 
Concious,  therefore,  that  there  are  many  judgments,  let  us  examine  all  our 
actions.  In  a  man  that  is  just  loss  is  suffered  ;  grievous  is  the  burning  of  the 
same  work :  in  the  wicked  man,  wretched  is  the  punishment." — Sermon  20, 
on  Psalm  cxviii,  t.  2. 

And  in  his  comment  on  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians — 

*'  '  If  any  man's  work  burn,  he  shall  suffer  loss.'  False  doctrine,  which 
4hall  perish,  is  the  work  that  is  said  to  burn,  for  all  bad  things  must  perish. 
To  suffer  loss  is  to  suffer  pain.  And  who  that  is  in  pain  does  not  suffer  loss  ? 
But  *  he  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  fire.'  He  will  be  saved,  the  Apostle  tells 
us,  because  his  substance  shall  remain,  whilst  his  bad  doctrine  shall  perish. 
Therefore  he  said,  'yet  so  as  by  fire,' — in  order  that  his  salvation  be  not  under- 
ilood  to  he  without  pain.  He  shows  that  he  shall  be  saved  indeed,  but  that  he 
shall  undergo  the  pain  of  fire,  and  be  thus  purified  ;  not  like  the  unbelieving 
and  wicked  man,  who  shall  be  punished  in  everlasting  fire." 

In  Obitu  Valentini — he  says,  in  an  apostrophe  to  the  departed 
emperor, 

"Blessed  shall  you  be  if  my  prayers  can  avail  any  thing.  No  day  shall 
pass  in  which  I  will  not  make  honorable  mention  of  you ;  no  night,  in  which 
you  shall  not  partake  of  my  prayers.  In  all  my  oblations  I  will  remembe; 
you." 

And  for  the  emperor  Theodosius,  deceased,  having  mad^  u 
solemn  prayer,  he  thus  proceeds  : — 

"  I  loved  him,  therefore  will  I  follow  him  to  the  land  of  the  living.  I  will 
not  leave  him  till  by  my  prayers  and  lamentations  he  shall  be  admitted  to  the 
holy  mount  of  the  Lord,  to  which  his  deserts  call  him.  Da  requiem  perfectam 
servo  tuo  Theodosio.''^ — Grant,  O  Lord,  perfect  repose  to  tliy  servant  Theo. 
drsius." 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY.         125 

Mr.  Pope  rose. — I  shall  endeavor  rapidly  to  follow  my  Rever- 
end antagonist  through  his  observations.  I  shall  prove  upon  his 
own  showing,  that  some  souls  were  confined  one  thousand  years 
in  purgatory ;  for  if  those  who  had  been  overwhelmed  in  the 
flood,  were  in  the  prison  of  purgatory  when  Christ  died,  he  will 
admit,  that  the  flood  was  somewhat  more  than  one  thousand  years 
before  the  death  of  Christ.  (Mr.  Maguire  here  observed,  that 
they  did  not  go  at  all  to  purgatory.)  With  respect  to  exercising 
an  act  of  faith,  how  can  any  one  exercise  it  on  the  authority  of 
the  church  of  Rome,  without  examining  the  proofs  of  that  autho- 
rity ?  The  church  of  Rome,  we  are  informed,  builds  her  autho- 
rity upon  historical,  that  is,  human  testimony.  This  is  somewhat 
like  building  castles  in  the  air.  My  Reverend  friend  has  stated, 
that  there  are  no  merits  but  the  merits  of  Christ.  But,  what  says 
the  council  of  Trent  ? 

"  If  any  one  shall  say,  that  the  good  works  of  a  justified  person  are  so  the 
gifts  of  God,  that  they  are  not  also  the  the  merits  of  the  justified  liimself;  or 
that  the  justified  person,  by  the  good  works  which,  through  the  grace  of  God 
and  the  merit  of  Jesus  Christ,  of  whom  he  is  a  living  member,  are  performed 
by  him,  does  not  truly  deserve  an  increase  of  grace,  eternal  hfe,and  the  attain- 
ment of  eternal  life  itself,  (if  he  shall  depart  in  grace)  and  also  an  increase  of 
glory,  let  him  be  accursed." — (Sess.  vi,  cap.  xvi,  can.  32.) 

What  does  the  doctrine  of  supererogation  mean,  if  there  be 
no  other  merits  but  the  merits  of  Christ  1  As  to  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost,  the  adorable  Saviour  (not  I)  has  said,  that  it  is 
unpardonable  ;  far  be  it  from  me,  to  limit  the  mercy  of  God  ;  as 
far  as  my  humble  efforts  reach,  I  would,  if  possible,  preach  the 
gospel  to  the  whole  world,  publishing  free  pardon  through  the 
blood  of  the  Lamb.  My  friend  has  asked,  whether  the  payment 
of  the  uttermost  farthing  refers  to  earth,  or  to  a  future  state. 
The  Saviour  in  St.  Matt,  is  exhorting  us  to  be  reconciled  on  tht 
way^  that  is,  in  this  world.  T  admit,  therefore,  at  once  that  "  the 
uttermost  farthing"  refers  to  the  future  state  ;  but  I  have  shown, 
that  the  passage  speaks  of  everlasting  punishment.  With  respect 
to  the  1st  of  Corinthians  and  3d  chap.  ;  I  have  already  proved 
that  the  fire  is  probatory  not  purgatorial,  and  that  it  is  to  try  all  ; 
therefore,  the  Apostle  does  not  speak  of  purgatory.  My  friend 
has  stated,  that  the  mission  of  Christ  to  the  spirits  in  prison, 
could  not  have  been  ineffectual.  I  take  him  upon  his  own  ground ; 
I  ask,  did  not  Christ  often  preach,  without  any  fruit  resulting 
from  his  labours  1  How  few  were  actually  converted  by  the  per- 
sonal ministry  of  Christ.  The  death  of  Christ  was  retrospective 
as  well  as  prospective.  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  his  day.  Many 
through  the  vista  of  distant  ages,  beheld  the  rising  of  the  star  ol 
Jacob,  by  faith  discerned  the  manifestation  of  the  Son  of  God, 
about  to  offer  an  atonement  for  the  sins  of  a  ruined  world.  My 
friend  has  said,  where  Christ  ?s,  there  is  paradise.     Did  Christ, 

XI* 


126  THE     DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

in  answer  lo  the  prayer  of  the  penitent  thief  say,  "  Yes,  I  y,\\] 
remember  thee  ;  I  will  go  to  purgatory  for  a  few  moments,  but 
shall  leave  thee  there,  to  purge  away  thy  sins."  'Tis  true,  where 
Christ  is,  there  is  happiness,  but  in  heaven  happiness  supreme  • 
there  the  Redeemer  shines  forth  in  all  the  effulgence  of  his  per 
sonal  glories.  I  have  shown  that  the  book  of  Wisdom  is  against 
the  second  book  of  Maccabees.  He  says,  that  the  writer  of 
Maccabees  commended  bravery — "  He  struck  himself  with  his 
sword,"  is  the.  expression — I  ask,  was  this  dying  nobly  ?  The 
commendation  is  not  that  of  bravery,  but  of  suicide.  (Mr.  Ma- 
guire  here  requested  Mr.  Pope  to  read  the  passage.  Mr.  Pope 
complied)  : 

**  Now  as  the  multitude  sought  to  rush  into  his  house,  and  to  break  open 
the  door,  and  to  set  fire  to  it,  when  he  was  ready  to  be  taken,  he  struck  him 
self  with  his  sword,  choosing  rather  to  die  nobly^''^  &c,  &c. 

My  friend  has  said,  that  the  idolaters  might  have  repented 
before  they  died,  I  answer,  had  they  repented,  they  would  have 
thrown  their  idols  to  the  moles  and  to  the  bats  :  but  we  read, 
that  they  were  found  under  their  garments. — (2  Mace,  xii,  40.) 
My  opponent  has  said,  that  Bishop  Fisher  was  a  martyr.  This 
circumstance,  I  should  have  thought,  would  have  given  greater 
weight  to  Bishop  Fisher's  authority,  concerning  the  novelty  of 
purgatory. 

My  adversary  has  objected  to  the  negative  proofs  from  Poly- 
carp  and  others,  as  if  I  brought  forward  no  direct  testimony. 
Hear  St.  Clement  Romanus  : — 

"  When  once  we  shall  have  departed  this  life,  there  is  no  room  for  us  in 
another,  either  to  confess,  or  to  repent." — Ep.  ad.  Cor.  xi,  §  8. 

Cyprian  :— 

"  The  end  of  the  temporal  life  being  accomplished,  we  are  divided  into  the 
habitations,  either  of  everlasting  death  or  immortality."-^ Ad  Demetrian. 
sec.  16. 

The  author  of  the  Questions  and  Answers,  attributed  to  Justin 
Martyr,  writes  thus  : — 

"  After  the  departure  of  the  soul  out  of  the  body,  there  is  presently  made 
a  distinction  betwixt  the  just  and  the  unjust :  for  they  are  brou;^ht  by  the 
angels  to  places  fit  for  them  :  the  souls  of  the  righteous  to  paradise,  where 
they  have  the  commerce  and  sight  of  angels  and  archangels  :  the  souls  of  the 
unjust  to  the  places  in  hell."—  Resp.  ad  Orthodox,  Cluaest.  75. 

Athanasius  says — 

•*  That  is  not  death  that  befalleth  the  righteous,  but  a  translation :  for  they 
are  translated  out  of  this  world  into  everlasting  rest :  and  as  a  man  would  go 
out  of  a  prison,  so  do  the  saints  go  out  of  this  troublesome  life,  unto  those 
good  things  that  are  prepared  for  them." — De  Virgin. 

Macarius  saith — 
**  When  the  holy  servants  of  God  remove  out  of  their  body,  the  chorus  of 


THE     DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  127 

angels  receive  their  souls  into  their  own  side  into  the  purer  world,  and  so  bring 
Ihem  unto  the  Lord." — CEgypt.  Horn.  22. 

Acrain — "  The  Lord  beholding  thy  mind  that  thou  lightest  and  lovest  him 
with  thy  whole  soul,  separates  death  from  thy  soul  in  one  hour,  for  this  is  not 
hard  for  him  to  do ;  for  he  taketh  thee  away  in  the  minute  of  an  hour,  and 
taketh  thee  into  his  own  bosom  and  unto  light,  for  he  plucketh  thee  away 
from  the  mouth  of  darkness,  and  presently  translates  thee  into  his  own  king- 
dom ;  for  God  can  easily  do  all  these  things  in  a  minute  of  an  hour — this 
provided  only  that  thou  bearest  love  unto  him." — Hom.  36. 

I  need  not  referr  to  other  quotations.  Some  of  the  passages 
which  my  opponent  has  cited,  permit  me  to  say,  merely  speak  of 
oblations  for  the  dead.  At  an  early  period  in  the  history  of  the 
church,  thanksgivings  were  offered  for  those  who  had  departed 
this  life  in  the  faith  and  patience  of  Jesus  Christ.  I  have  followed 
my  friend  through  some  of  his  ramblings.  He  talks  of  sophistry 
and  quibbling,  and  expresses  his  wish  to  come  to  strong  argu- 
ments. I  would  also  like  to  come  to  strong  argument.  You 
will  decide  whether  the  proofs  of  my  opponent  are  fitted  to  sup- 
port the  quaking  foundation  on  which  he  stands.  I  shall  now 
first  refer  to  presumptive  arguments  against  purgatory.  It  is  not 
probable  that  a  doctrine  which  makes  so  wide  a  distinction 
between  the  rich  and  the  poor,  should  have  come  from  that  God 
who  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  and  who  has  chosen  the  poor 
rich  in  faith,  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom.  This  doctrine  also  savors 
of  inhumanity.  I  would  assist,  as  far  as  my  ability  would  enable 
me,  my  humblest  neighbour,  in  rescuing  from  destruction  his  ox 
or  his  ass  ;  but  what  shall  we  say  of  a  system,  which,  believing 
that  masses  can  assist  souls  suffering  in  purgatory,  refuses  to 
olfer  them,  until  the  ready  cash  is  paid  down  !  Again 
the  doctrine  of  purgatory,  viewed  in  the  light  of  holy  scripture, 
is  inconsistent  with  the  revealed  will  of  God.     St.  Paul  asks — 

"  He  that  spared  not  his  own  son,  but  delivered  him  up  for  us  all,  how  shall 
he  not  with  him  also  freely  give  his  people  all  tilings  ? — Rom.  viii,  32. 

"  As  the  heaven  is  high  above  the  earth,  so  great  is  his  mercy  toward  them 
that  fear  him." 

"  He  knoweth  our  frame,  he  remembereth  that  we  are  but  dust :  like  as  a 
father  pitieth  his  children,  so  the  Lord  pitieth  them  that  fear  him  :  the  mercy 
of  the  Lord  is  from  everlasting  to  everlasting  upon  them  that  fear  him,  and 
his  righteousness  unto  children's  children."— Ps.  ciii,  11,  13,  14,  17. 

Judgment  he  calls  "  his  strange  work ;"  "  He  does  not  will- 
mgly  afflict  the  children  of  men  ;"  (Lament,  iii,  33,)  and,  if  his 
people  are  called  to  taste  the  cup  of  sorrow,  he  sweetens  it  with 
many  a  consoling  ingredient  by  the  word  of  God,  and  teaching 
of  his  spirit.  God  loves  his  people  with  an  eternal  and  unchang- 
ing affection.  And  can  I  suppose,  that  He  who  for  their  sakes 
j^pared  not  his  co-equal  and  co-eternal  Son,  will  consign  them 
to  a  place  of  suffering,  when  they  shall  have  passed  through  the 
miseries  of  this  sinful  world?    Again  this  doctrine  is  derogatory 


128  THE    DOCTRINE     OF    PURGATORY. 

to  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  If  it  be  a  fact,  that  the  one  oblation 
on  the  cross  is  all-sufficient ;  if  the  promise  of  the  ntw  covO' 
nant  runs  thus,  "  thy  sins  and  thine  iniquities  will  I  remember 
no  more,"  "  the  blood  of  Christ  cleanseth  from  all  sin  ;"  if  it 
be  a  truth  that  God  "  will  not  give  his  glory  to  another,"  doe* 
not  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  derogate  from  the  sacrifice  of  Cal* 
vary  ?     Hear  the  council  of  Trent — 

"  If  any  shall  say,  that  after  the  grace  of  justification  has  been  received, 
the  offence  is  so  remitted  to  the  penitent  sinner,  and  the  guilt  of  eternal  pun 
ishment  so  effaced,  that  there  remains  no  guilt  of  temporal  punishment  to  bf 
suffered  either  in  this  world,  or  in  the  world  to  come  in  purgatory,  before 
admission  can  be  obtained  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  let  him  be  accursed." 
Sess.  vi,  cap.  xvi,  can.  30. 

Oh,  my  friends,  what  blasphemy  ijs  such  language  against  that 
Redeemer  who  bowed  the  heav€iis  and  came  down  amongst  us — 
who  lifted  oflT  the  curse  of  heaven's  violated  law,  and  redeemed 
the  immortal  soul  by  his  own  blood  ! — David  says, 

"  As  far  as  the  east  is  from  the  west,  so  far  hath  he  removed  our  iniquities 
from  us :  who  forgiveth  cdl  thy  iniquities :  who  healeth  all  thy  diseases." — 
Ps.  cii,  12,  13. 

In  Isaiah  we  read, 

"I  am,  I  am  he,  that  blot  out  thy  iniquities  for  my  own  sake,  and  I  will 
not  remember  thy  sins." — xhii,  25. 

"I  will  forgive  their  iniquity,  and  I  will  remember  their  sin  no  more." 
Jer.  xxxi,  34. 

"Thou  shalt  sprinkle  me  with  hyssop,  and  I  shall  be  cleansed :  thou  shalt 
wash  me,  and  I  shall  be  whiter  than  snow." — Ps.  i,  ix. 

"  If  your  sins  be  as  scarlet,  they  shall  be  made  white  as  snow:  and  if  they 
be  red  as  crimson,  they  shall  be  white  as  wool." — Isaiah  i,  18. 

kr\d    yet  the   believer,  according  to  the  church  of  Rome, 
requires  fire  to  make  his  sins  whiter  than  snow ! 
Do  I  not  read,  Isaiah  xxxviii,  17, 

"But  thou  hast  delivered  my  soul  that  it  should  not  perish:  thou  hast  cast 
all  my  sins  behind  thy  back." 

Do  I  not  read,  John  i,  29, 

"Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  behold  him  who  taketh  away  the  sins  (jf  the 
world." 

And  again,  1  John  i,  7, 

"  The  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  his  Son,  cleanseth  us  from  dl  sin.'* 

And  at  the  9th  verse, 

"  If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and 
to  cleanse  us  from  all  iniquity." 

In  Colossians  we  read 

•*  You,  when  j'ou  were  dead  in  your  sins,  and  the  uncircumcision  of  your 
fiesh,  he  hath  quickened  together  with  him ;  forgiving  you  all  oflences." — w,  14 

What  says  the  prophet  Micah,  \u^  19. 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  129 

•■  He  will  turn  again,  and  have  mercy  on  us  :  he  will  put  away  our  "iniqui- 
ties ;  and  he  will  cast  all  our  sins  into  the  bottom  of  the  sea." 

We  read  that, 

"  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  save  that  which  has  been  laid,  which  is 
Christ  Jesus." — 1  Cor.  iii,  11. 

The  Apostle  Paul  speaks  of  confidence — 

"  Their  sins  and  iniquities  will  I  remember  no  more  j  now  where  remission 
of  these  is,  there  is  no  more  an  offering  for  sin." 

"  Having  therefore,  brethren,  boldness  to  enter  into  the  holiest  by  the  blood 
of  Jesus,  by  a  new  and  living  way  which  he  hath  consecrated  for  us  through 
the  vail,  that  is  to  say,  his  flesh,  and  having  an  high  priest  over  the  house  of 
God,  let  us  draw  near  with  a  true  heart,  in  full  assurance  of  faith,  having  our 
hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience." — Heb.  x,  19,  22. 

Mr.  Maguire  would  be  justified  in  censuring  confidence,  if 
the  believer  placed  his  dependance  on  his  own  works  for  salva- 
tion :  but  confidence  is  warranted,  when  exclusively  built  upon 
the  foundation  laid  in  Zion,  the  obedience  unto  death  of  the 
Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ.     St.  Paul  says — 

"  God  commendeth  his  charity  towards  us,  because  when  as  yet  we  were 
sinners,  according  to  the  time,  Christ  died  for  us ;  much  more  therefore,  being 
now  justified  by  his  blood,  shall  we  be  saved  from  wrath  through  him ;  for  if 
when  we  were  enemies,  we  were  reconciled  to  God  by  the  death  of  his  Son, 
much  more  being  reconciled  shall  we  be  saved  through  his  life." — Rom. 
v,  8,  10. 

What  is  the  meaning  of  the  Apostle's  argument  ? 

**  If  when  we  were  enemies  we  were  reconciled  to  God,  by  the  death  of  hia 
Son,  much  more^  after  we  have  been  reconciled  shall  ive  be  saved  by  his  life." 

I  would  argue,  that  if,  when  we  were  enemies,  God  reconciled 
us  to  himself,  surely  he  will  not  consign  the  sinner  to  such  a  place 
of  torment  as  purgatory,  after  he  has  become  his  adopted  child. 

"There  is  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are  in  Christ  Jesus,"  (says  St. 
Paul,  Rom.  viii,  1.) 

"  Amen,  Amen,  I  sajr  unto  you,  he  who  heareth  m}r  word,  and  believeth 
him  that  sent  me,  hath  life  everlasting,  and  cometh  not  into  judgment,  but  is 
passed  from  death  to  life. — John,  v,  24. 

I  say,  if  there  be  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are  in  Christ 
Jesus,  surely  the  Deity,  who  is  infinite  in  justice,  would  not 
consign  the  believer,  against  whom  there  is  no  condemnation, 
to  the  tortures  of  purgatory.     St.  Paul  writes, 

"  Who  shall  lay  any  thing  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?  It  is  God  that  justi- 
fieth.  Who  is  he  that  condemneth  ?  It  is  Christ  that  di^d,  yea,  rather,  that 
is  risen  again,  who  is  even  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also  maketh  inter- 
cession tor  us.  Who  shall  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ?  Shall  tribu- 
lation or  distress,  or  persecution,  or  famine,  or  nakedness,  or  peril,  or 
Bword :  as  it  written,  for  thy  sake  we  are  killed  all  the  day  long,  we  are 
accounted  as  sheep  for  the  slaughter ;  nay,  in  all  these  things  we  are  w?^r« 
than  conqueroi  s.  through  him  that  hath  loved  us.  For  I  am  persuaded,  that 
neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels,  nor  principalities,  nor  powers,  nor  things 
present,  nor  tilings  to  comp,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature, 


130  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

shall  be  a  hie  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesns  out 
Lord.— Rom.  viii,  33,  39. 

The  Donay  version  of  the  commencement  of  the  passage 
which  I  have  read,  is  absurd.  To  the  question,  *'  Who  shall  ac- 
cuse against  the  elect  of  God  ?"  the  Douay  Bible  replies,  *'  God 
that  justifieth  :"  as  if  the  God  who  justifies,  was  the  accuser  of 
his  elect.  And  again,  to  the  question,  "  Who  is  he  that  shall  con- 
demn?" The  Douay  translation  answers,  "  Christ  Jesus  that 
died  :"  as  if  the  Saviour  condemned  his  people.  By  the  way, 
I  may  mention,  that  Griesbach  beautifully  elucidates  the  pas- 
sage, by  placing  a  mark  of  interrogation  after  the  expression 
"  God  that  justifieth,"  and  at  the  end  of  the  34th  verse ;  the 
meaning  of  the  passage  will  then  be — who  shall  lay  any  thing 
to  the  charge  of  God's  elect?  Shall  the  God  who  justifies  them^ 
lay  any  thing  to  their  charge  ?  Who  is  he  that  shall  condemn  ? 
Shall  Christ  condemn,  Vho  died,  and  having  been  exalted  to  the 
right  hand  of  the  everlasting  throne  intercedes  for  his  people  ? 
I  say  with  Paul,  "  If  God  be  for  his  people,  who  shall  be  against 
them  ?"  If  God  acquits  them,  shall  the  church  of  Rome  condemn 
them  to  purgatory  ? 

I  shall  fill  up  the  few  minutes  that  remain,  by  reading  to  you 
quotations  from  several  Roman  catholic  writers,  which  clearly 
show,  that  during  the  dark  ages  the  state  of  things  was  sucli, 
that  opinions  the  most  monstrous  could  with  facility  have  been 
introduced. 

A  bishop  of  the  church,  in  year  900,  thus  complains: 

"  So  great  folly  now  oppresseth  the  miserable  world,  that  at  this  day  more 
absurd  things  are  believed  by  Christians  than  ever  any  could  impose  upon 
the  blind  pagans." — Agoberd.  Epis«  Lug.  Lib.  de  Grandi,  &c. 

Sabellius  siaith, 

"  It  is  wonderful  to  observe,  what  a  strange  forgetfulness  of  all  arts  did 
about  this  time  seize  upon  men,  insomuch  that  neither  the  Popes  nor  other 
princes  seemed  to  have  any  sense  or  apprehension  of  any  thing  that  might  be 
useful  to  human  life.  There  were  no  wholesome  laws,  no  reparations  of 
churches,  no  pursuit  of  liberal  arts ;  but  a  kind  of  stupidity,  and  madness, 
and  forgetfulness  of  manners  had  possessed  the  minds  of  men." 

And  a  little  after, — "  I  cannot,"  says  he  "  but  much  wonder  from  whence 
these  tragical  examples  of  the  Popes  should  spring,  and  how  their  minds 
should  come  to  be  so  devoid  of  all  piety,  as  neither  to  regard  the  person  which 
thsy  sustained,  nor  the  place  they  were  in. — Enead.  9,  Lib.  i,  900. 

Phil.  Burgomansis  says — 

"  It  happened  in  that  age,  through  the  slothfulness  of  men,  that  there  was  a 
general  decay  of  virtue,  both  in  the' head  and  in  the  members." — (Ann.  906.) 

I  wonder  who  the  Head  was  ?     And  again, 

"These  times,  through  the  ambition  and  cruel  tyranny  of  the  Popes,  were 
extremely  unhappy ;  for  the  Popes  setting  aside  the  fear  of  God  and  his  wor- 
ship, fell  into  such  enmities  among  themselves,  as  cruel  tyrants  exercise 
towards  one  another." — (Ann.  908.) 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGAl'ORT.  131 

And  Platina,  tLeir  own  writer,  in  his  History  of  the  Popes, 
gives  the  following  account  of  their  barbarities  to  their  prede- 
cessors, though  many  years  deceased. 

"These  Popes  minded  hothing  else  but  how  they  might  extinguish  both 
the  name  and  dignity  of  their  predecessors." 

Sigonius,  speaking  of  these  times,  about  the  commencement 
of  the  10th  century,  calls  them — 

"The  foulest  and  blackest,  both  in  respect  to  the  wickedness  of  the  princes 
and  madness  of  the  people,  that  are  to  be  found  in  all  antiquity." — De  Regn. 
Ital.  Lib.  6. 

Genebrard,  speaking  of  the  same  time,  observes, 

"  This  is  called  the  unhappy  age,  being  destitute  of  men  eminent  for  wit 
and  learning ;  as  also  of  famous  princes  and  Popes.  In  this  time  there  was 
scarce  any  thing  done  worthy  to  be  remembered  by  posterity." — Chron,  Lib.  4. 

Gerbert,  about  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  century,  gives 
this  brief  character  of  the  Roman  Church,  in  his  Epist.  40, 
"The  world  stands  amazed  at  the  manners  of  Rome." 
Werner  gives  this  character  of  these  times  in  these  words  : 

"  About  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand,  there  began  an  effeminate  time, 
in  which  the  Christian  faith  began  to  degenerate  exceedingly,  and  to  dechne 
from  its  ancient  vigour ;  insomuch,  that  in  many  countries  of  Christendom, 
neitlier  sacraments,  nor  ecclesiastical  rites  were  observed ;  and  people  were 
given  to  soothsaying,  and  witlicrafts ;  and  the  priest  was  like  the  people."— 
Fac  Temporum. 

Strong  indeed  is  the  complaint  of  a  great  prelate.    He  says — 

"In  the  west,  and  almost  all  the  world  over,  especially  among  those  who 
are  called  the  faithful,  faith  failed,  and  there  was  no  fear  of  God  among  them. 
Justice  was  perished  from  among  men,  and  violence  prevailing  against  equity, 
governed  the  nations.  Fraud,  deceit  and  the  acts  of  cozenage  were  grown 
universal.  All  kind  of  virtue  gave  way  as  an  useless  thing  and  wickedness 
supplied  its  place.  The  M^orld  seemed  to  be  dechning  apace  towards  its  even- 
ing, and  the  second  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  to  draw  near:  for  love  was 
grown  cold,  and  faith  was  not  found  on  earth.  All  things  were  in  confusion, 
and  the  world  looked  as  if  it  would  return  again  to  its  old  chaos.  All  sorts 
♦  *  +  ****  were  committed  with  the  same  freedom  as  if  they  had 
been  lawful  actions ;  for  men  neither  blushed  at  them,  nor  were  punished 
for  them.  Nor  did  the  clergy  live  better  than  the  people ;  for  the  bishops 
were  negligent  of  the  duty  of  their  place,  &c,  &c.  In  a  word,  men  run  them- 
selves heatHong  into  all  vice,  and  all  flesh  hid  corrupted  its  way." — Bell. 
Sacr.  Lib.  1,  cap.  18. 

Such  was  the  state  of  things  in  the  dark  ages,  when  princes 
bowed  their  knee  to  the  Pope — did  any  improvement  afterwards 
takes  place  1 

St.  Bernard  in  the  thirteenth  century,  complain  thus, 

"  We  cannot  now  say,  as  is  the  people,  so  is  the  priest ;  for  the  people  are 
not  so  bad  as  the  priests." — In  Con  v.  S.  Pauli.  Ser.  1. 

And  again,  "The  bishops  to  whom  the  church  of  God  is  now  committed, 
are  not  teachers  but  seducers,  not  pastors  but  impostors,  not  prelates  but 
Pilates." 


132  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

Mr.  Maguire — I  agree  probably  with  Mr.  Pope  in  a  grea\ 
portion  of  what  he  has  quoted  from  Scripture.  When  Mr.  Pope 
talks  of  a  detention  for  one  thousand  years  in  purgatory,  and 
speaks  of  those  who  were  overwhelmed  by  the  deluge,  I  have 
only  to  say,  that  as  they  died  in  mortal  sin,  they  could  not  there- 
fore get  admission  even  to  purgatory.  The  patriarchs  departed 
in  peace  with  God,  but  I  affirm  that  they  were  detained  in  prison 
until  our  Saviour  came  to  them  after  his  death,  to  announce  the 
glorious  tidings  of  salvation.  For  no  man  could  enter  heaven 
unless  through  the  infinite  merits  of  Christ  crucified.  The  patri- 
archs remained  in  a  third  place  until  released  by  Christ.  This 
is  a  point  of  Catholic  doctrine.  The  onus  lies  on  Mr.  Pope  to 
show  that  that  third  place  has  ceased  to  exist. 

As  to  the  text  quoted  relative  to  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost, 
St.  Augustine,  St.  Cyprian,  and  a  variety  of  more  recent  com- 
mentators, declare  that  it  is  to  be  understood,  like  the  text  con- 
cerning the  rich  man,  not  of  an  absolute  impossibility,  but  of 
great,  perhaps  extreme  difficulty;  that  is,  the  grace  of  repentance 
must  come  from  the  Holy  Ghost.  Now  he  who  attributes  the 
work  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the  Devil,  cannot  receive  such  grace, 
therefore  his  salvation  must  be  a  matter  of  great,  of  rare  diffi 
culty — since  his  repentance  depends  upon  the  spirit  he  blas- 
phemes. But  if  the  heart  of  the  man  who  has  even  committed 
such  a  sin  shall,  in  the  course  of  time,  become  Aoroughly 
changed — if  he  shall  sincerely  and  heartily  repent,  will  Mr.  Pope 
say  that  our  Saviour  will  not  extend  forgiveness  to  that  man  ? 
That  is  the  opinion  of  some  Protestant  Divines ;  but  it  never 
shall  be  mine.  I  said  that  there  was  no  pain  where  Christ  was. 
My  friend  retorted,  and  affirmed  that  wherever  Christ  was  pre- 
sent, there  were  heaven  and  happiness.  He  concluded  this 
portion  of  his  argment  with  an  appeal  to  the  feelings  of  the  meet- 
ing. I  shall  make  no  effijrts  to  excite  your  feelings  or  to  bring 
into  play  your  prejudices  and  passions.  My  only  appeal  shall 
be  to  direct  and  positive  arguments. 

Mr.  Pope  referred  to  what  is  said  of  Nicanor  in  the  book  of 
Maccabees,  in  order  to  prove  that  that  book  was  not  canonical 
or  inspired.  Do  we  not  read  in  the  book  of  Judges  that  Jepthe, 
who  is  there  recorded  as  the  ruler  of  the  people  of  Goland — who 
is  spoken  of  as  a  valiant  man,  slew  his  own  daughter,  in  pursu- 
ance of  a  vow  made  to  God.  Are  we,  therefore,  to  reject  a» 
uncanonical  the  book  in  which  this  is  recorded  ?  Do  we  not  reao 
of  Moses  having  murdered  the  Egyptian — of  a  father  having 
children  by  his  own  two  daughters.  Are  the  books  in  which 
those  facts  are  re  ated  to  be  discarded  as  uncanonical  ? 

Did  Mr.  Pope  quote  any  passages  to  prove  that  the  righteous 
must  g^  directly  to  heaven,  without  passing  through  purgatory  J 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  133 

If  the  just  man  fall  seven  times  a  day,  is  it  derogating  from  the 
merits  of  Christ  to  say,  that  that  man  must  suffer  for  a  tkne  in 
purgatory  ]  Did  not  our  Saviour  annex  conditions  to  our  obtain- 
ing salvation,  such  as  baptism, — without  which  the  atonement  on 
the  cross  cannot  be  applied  to  us  ?  Christ  will  not  redeem  ua 
unless  we  are  washed  in  the  waters  of  baptism.  Does  he  any 
where  say,  that  man  will  be  justified  by  faith  only,  without  baptism? 

With  regard  to  the  belief  of  the  Greek  church,  on  the  subject 
of  purgatory,  I  have  here  the  translation  of  Dupi  's  Ecclesiasti- 
cal History,  by  a  Protestant,  and  from  it  I  shall  read  the  follow- 
ing passage  : 

"  It  is  evident  from  some  very  ancient  records  of  the  church,  that  it  was  a 
custom  among  the  christians,  ub  antiquo,  to  pray  for  the  souls  of  the  faithful 
departed,  in  the  dreadful  mysteries.  St.  Chrysostom  plainly  tells  us,  that  it  was 
decreed  by  the  Apostles.  It  is  certain,  that  it  was  in  use  about  two  hundred 
years  after  Christ.  This  is  proved  from  Tertullian.  who  thus  speaks,  *  let  th^ 
faithful  widow  pray  for  the  soul  of  her  husband.'  This  we  find  practised  bj 
many  of  the  most  eminent  Fathers  of  the  church." 

I  have  already  proved  by  quotations  from  Tertullian,  St. 
Cyprian,  and  other  most  eminent  Fathers,  that  during  the  firsi 
five  hundred  years  of  the  Christian  era,  it  was  the  practice  of 
the  church  to  pray  for  the  dead.  And  I  have  shown  in  the 
foregoing  extract,  what  is.  the  opinion  of  the  Greek  church. 
When  Claude,  the  Huguenot,  was  engaged  in  the  celebrated 
conference  with  Bossuet,  he  went  to  the  trouble  of  writing  to 
the  Greek  church,  in  order  to  ascertain  their  opinions  on  the 
doctrines  of  transubstantiation,  purgatory,  and  the  invocation  of 
saints.  A  council  of  the  Greek  church  was  assembled,  and  the 
bishops  who  attended  solemnly  decided,  that  they  held  the 
doctrine  of  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament,  the 
doctrine  of  purgatory,  and  of  the  invocation  of  saints. 

With  respect  to  the  character  of  the  Catholic  church,  the  fol- 
lowing passage  is  taken  from  the  works  of  the  celebrated  Dr. 
Jeremy  Taylor,  whose  orthodoxy  will  not  surely  be  questioned 
by  Mr.  Pope : 

"There  are  many  considerations  in  the  Catholic  church,  which  may  retain 
persons  of  much  reason,  and  more  piety,  in  its  communion.  They  know  it 
to  have  been  the  religion  of  their  for^efathers,  which  had  possession  of  men's 
understandings  before  Prctestantism  had  a  name.  First,  its  doctrines  had  a 
long  continuance  and  possession  of  the  church ;  which,  therefore,  cannot  be 
easily  supposed  in  the  present  possessors  to  be  a  design,  since  they  have 
received  it  from  so  many  ages.  Its  long  prescription^  wnich  is  such  a  preju- 
dice, as  cannot  with  many  arguments  be  retrenched,  as  relying  upon  these 
grounds,  that  truth  is  more  ancient  than  falsehood ;  that  God  would  not,  for 
so  many  ages,  forsake  his  church  and  leave  her  in  error.  Then  comes  the 
splendour  and  beauty  of  that  church ;  its  pompous  service,  the  stateliness  and 
solemnity  of  its  hierarchy,  its  name  'Catholic,'  the  antiquity  of  its  doctrines, 
the  continual  succession  of  its  bishops,  and  their  immediate  derivation  from 
the  Apostles.  Add  to  this  the  multitude  and  vari  ^ty  of  people  which  are  of 
its  persuasion,  the  consent  of  elder  ages,  the  great  consent  of  one  part  ivitb 


1S4  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

another,  contrasted  with  the  great  diflerences  which  are  commenced  among 
their  adversaries.  To  this  again  add  its  happiness  in  being  the  instrument 
in  converting  divers  nations — the  piety  and  austerity  of  its  rehgious  orders — 
the  single  hie  of  its  priests  and  bishops — the  severity  of  its  fasts — the  great 
reputation  of  its  bishops  for  faith  and  sanctity — the  known  hohness  of  some 
of  its  rehgious  founders  of  orders — its  miracles — the  accidents  and  casualties 
wliich  have  happened  to  its  adversaries,  the  oblique  acts  and  indirect  pro- 
ceedin;:^  of  some  of  those  who  have  departed  from  it,  and  above  all,  the  name 
of  heretic  and  schismatic  which  the  Catholic  church  has  fastened  on  them. 
Protestants  commit  themselves  by  the  conduct  of  the  new  reformers — at  first, 
a  few  and  of  the  lowest  rank  of  the  clergy,  being  made  under  ecclesiastical 
censures,  assisted  against  their  spiritual  superiors  by  some  secular  powers, 
when  both  these  and  they  were  subject  to  that  ecclesiastical  hierarchy,  which 
they  opposed." 

The  following  passage  is  taken  from  Sir  Edwin  Sandys' 
Relation  of  the  Western  Religion  : — * 

"  The  Catholic  church  was  founded  by  the  Apostles,  with  promise,  that  the 
gates  of  hell  should  not  prevail  against  it.  It  has  continued  on  now,  till  the 
end  of  1600  years,  with  an  honourable  line  of  near  two  hundred  and  forty 
Popes,  successors  of  St.  Peter, — both  tyrants,  traitors,  pagans,  and  heretics, 
in  vain  wresting,  raging,  and  undermining  it.  All  the  general  councils,  that 
ever  were  in  the  world  have  approved  and  honoured  it.  God  hath  miracu- 
lously blc'^t  it  from  above,  so  that  many  doctors  have  enriched  it  with  their 
writings;  armies  of  saints  have  embellished  it  with  their  holiness ;  martyrs 
with  tlieir  blood  ;  virgins  with  their  purity.  Even  at  this  day,  amid  the  diffi- 
culties of  unjust  rebellions,  and  the  unnatural  revolts  of  h^  nearest  children, 
yet  she  stretcheth  out  her  arms  to  the  utmost  corners  of  the  world,  newly 
embracing  whoje  nations  into  her  bosom.  In  all  other  opposite  churches 
there  are  found  inward  dissensions  and  contrariety ;  change  of  opinions, 
uncertainty  of  resolutions,  with  robbing  of  churches,  rebelling  against  gov- 
ernors, and  confusion  of  order.  In  the  Catholic  church  there  is  undivided 
unity;  resolutions  unalterable;  the  most  heavenly  order,  reaching  from  the 
height  of  all  power  to  the  lowest  of  all  subjection ;  all  with  admirable  harmony, 
and  undefective  correspondence,  bending  the  same  way,  to  the  effecting  of  the 
same  work,"  &c. 

The  venerable  and  learned  Earl  Fitzwilliam,  in  his  Letters 
of  Atticus,  thus  speaks  of  the  Catholic  church : 

"How  I  am  struck  with  admiration,  when  I  come  to  consider  the  antiquity 
of  this  venerable  Roman  church ;  its  vast  extent ;  the  majesty,  the  magnifi- 
cence, the  symmetry  of  its  edifice;  its  immutable  stability  amid  all  the  perse- 
cution which  it  has  undergone ;  its  admirable  discipline,  which  seems  traced 
out  by  the  hand  of  supernatural  wisdom;  the  impotence  of  its  adversaries, 
notwithsanding  all  their  sophistry,  invectives,  and  calumnies ;  when  I  con- 
template the  dignity,  the  virtue,  the  talents  of  its  apologists;  the  vices,  the 
dishonesty  of  its  first  assailants;  the  total  extinction  of  so  many  sects, 
v/hich  have  risen  up  against  it ;  the  little  consistency  of  the  present  sects ; 
their  variations  on  points  of  doctrine,"  &c. 

The  ministers  of  the  French  reformed  churches,  in  a  memorial, 
which  they  presented  to  the  government,  in  the  1750,  express 
themselves  upon  this  subject,  in  the  following  manner : — 

"We  do  not  dissemble,  that  in  the  parallel,  which  we  sometimes  make 
between  your  church  and  ours,  the  striking  features,  notwithstanding  some 
abuses,  are  on  your  side.     You  certainly  existed  before  we  did,  since  your 

*■  S«e  Note  on  this  passajje  appended  to  Mr.  Pope's  Second  Speech  on  Fourth  Dsy 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  135 

origin  is  coeval  with  that  of  the  Apostles.  Whilst,  as  for  us,  we  have  not 
yet  existed  three  centuries:  since  in  1515,  both  your  ancestors  and  ouri 
communicated  at  the  san>emass;  celebrated  together  the  feast  of  Easter, 
and  lived  in  perfect  unanimity  of  sentiment.  Moreover,  the  chain  of  tradition, 
whose  first  link  was  attached  by  Peter  and  Paul  to  the  church  of  Rome,  has 
been  in  such  manner  preserved  amongst  you,  that,  if  the  Irenseuses,  the 
Gregories,  the  Athanasiuses,  the  Chrysostoms,  were  now  again  to  return  to 
the  earth,  it  would  be  in  the  church  of  Rome  alone,  that  they  would  find  that 
lociety,  of  which,  once,  they  had  been  the  members." 

It  was  such  considerations  as  these  that  induced  Henry  the 
Fourth  of  France,  to  abandon  the  Protestant,  and  embrace  the 
Catholic  religion. — 

"  When  this  illustrious  hero,  previously  to  his  conversion,  was  induced  to 
study  the  Catholic  religion,  he  proposed,  through  the  medium  of  Sully,  a 
variety  of  questions  to  the  Protestant  ministers.  Amongst  others  he  proposed 
the  following: — *  Whether  it  was  lawful  for  him  to  become  a  Catholic?-' 
Their  reply  v/as : — *  That  it  was  lawful  for  him  to  become  a  Catholic :  seeing, 
that  salvation  is  attainable  in  the  Catholic  church.'     They  added,  it  is  true, 

*  Our  religion  is  the  more  perfect ;  but  still,  the  church  of  Rome  is  sufficient 
for  all  the  securities  of  future  happiness.'  This  answer  obtained, — the  mon- 
arch now  consulted  the  Catholic  prelates  and  theologians  respecting  the 
security  of  salvation  in  the  Protestant  church.  But,  he  could  not  find  one 
single  mdividual  amongst  these,  that  would  allow  such  benefit  to  exist  in  this 
society.     Whence,  he  reasoned  in  this  manner  with  the  Protestant  ministers  : 

*  You  pretend,'  he  said  to  them,  *  that,  by  continuing  in  your  communion,  my 
religious  state  is  more  perfect,  than  if  I  were  to  become  a  Catholic;  whilst, 
at  the  same  time,  you  own,  that  I  may  be  saved  in  the  Catholic  church. 
Now,  the  Catholics,  on  the  contrary,  all  maintain  that  salvation  is  not  attain- 
able in  your  religion ;  but  that  it  is  confined  to  the  church  of  Rome.  So 
that,  by  uniting  myself^  to  the  church  of  Rome,  I  may  be  saved,  both  according 
to  your  acknowledgment  and  theirs.  Therefore,  1  should  be  the  maddest  of 
men,  if,  in  a  business  of  such  infinite  importance,  I  did  not  take  the  safest 
side  ;  consequently ^  I  decide  in  favour  of  the  church  of  Rome,  in  which,  by  the 
acknowledgment  of  all  the  world,  and  even  of  the  men  who  are  the  most 
opposed  to  each  other — my  salvation  is  secure.' " 

Such  was  the  reasoning,  and  such  the  decision,  of  Henry. . 
They  were,  alike,  the  dictates  of  good  sense  and  prudence. 
The  declaration  of  the  Protestant  university  of  Helmstadt,  in 
the  case  of  the  Protestant  princess  of  Wolfenbuttle,  who  was 
destined  to  be  married  to  the  archduke  of  Austria,  is  similar  to 
the  preceding  one  of  the  French  reformed  ministers,  and  presents 
the  same  kind  of  inference.  The  members  of  the  above  univer- 
sity, in  the  year  1707,  were  consulted, 

"  Whether  in  the  consideration  of  the  proposed  marriage,  the  princess 
might,  in  conscience,  embrace  the  Catholic  religion  ?" 

The  answer,  delivered  in  the  form  of  a  declaration,  was  to 
the  following  effect :  — 

"  First,  that  the  difference  between  the  Protestant  and  the  Catholic  reli- 
gions is  not  fundamental.  Secondly,  that  is  therefore  lawful  to  pass  from 
the  Protestant  to  the  Catholic  church." 

Mr.  Pope,  you  will  be  pleased  to  recollect,  drew  a  frightfa 
picture  of  this  same  Catholic  church,  and  described  some  of  the 


136  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATOHYc 

Popes  in  the  dark  ages  as  execrable  characters.  I  will  not 
deny — indeed,  I  have  already  admitted,  that  there  were  some 
bad  characters  among  the  Popes — but  they  were  few  in  number. 
Were  there  not  bad  she  Popes  in  England  ? 

Mr.  Pope  spoke  of  the  dissolute  lives  of  the  clergy,  but  ha 
does  not  describe  more  faithfully  than  does  Reeve,  in  his  Eccle- 
siastical History,  the  dissoluteness  and  neglect  of  morals  which 
brought  on  the  Reformation.  A  reformation  was  decidedly  re- 
quired, but  it  was  a  reformation  in  morals.  Such  a  reformation 
as  the  Almighty  would  bring  about,  by  the  instrumentality  of  good 
and  virtuous  characters.  Mr.  Pope  quotes  a  passage  from  Da- 
vid :  "  Wash  me  yet  more  from  my  iniquity  and  cleanse  me 
from  my  sin."  Here  is  the  strongest  proof  that  David  had  been 
already  forgiven  his  sins,  and  his  supplication  to  the  Lord  to 
wash  him  still  more^  shows  that  the  temporal  punishment  of  the 
sin  remains  after  the  eternal  had  been  remitted.  David  adds — 
"  For  I  know  my  iniquity,  and  my  sin  is  always  before  me.'* 
David  well  knew  the  effects  of  sin — he  was  aware,  that  thougfc 
the  eternal  punishment  due  for  his  iniquities  had,  through  the 
mercy  of  God,  been  remitted,  that  still  he  had  a  further  account 
to  render,  and  that  a  temporal  punishment  was  still  to  be  inflicted. 

Mr.  Pope  has  endeavoured  to  work  upon  the  feelings  of  his 
auditory,  by  continual  appeals  to  the  merits  of  the  Redeemer's 
sacrifice.  Did  I  ever  deny  that  the  merits  of  Christ's  blood 
washed  out  all  sin  ?  But  who  will  deny  that  a  moral  martyrdom 
will  render  us  more  acceptable  in  the  eyes  of  the  Redeemer? 
Who  will  assert,  that  if  Christ  grants  favours  to  us,  we  should 
not  labour  to  render  ourselves,  in  a  certain  degree,  deserving 
of  them  ]  Will  not  a  master  be  more  ready  to  grant  favours  to 
a  servant,  in  proportion  as  that  servant  becomes  entitled  to  them 
by  his  good  and  moral  conduct?  Though  I  am  not,  hke  Mr. 
Pope,  always  dwelling  upon  the  merits  of  our  Redeemer's  blood, 
which  should  never  be  introduced  but  with  reverence  and  awe, 
yet  I  am  always  ready  to  assert  my  faith  in  their  infinite  and 
glorious  efficacy.  Mr.  Pope  has  spoken  of  the  confidence  of 
the  true  believers — I  would  remind  those  who  possess  such  con- 
fidence to  beware.  I  would  tell  them,  in  the  language  of  scrip- 
ture, to  "  take  heed  lest  they  fall."  The  inspired  writer  says, 
"  that  no  man  knovveth  whether  he  be  worthy  of  love  or  hatred," 
and  our  Saviour  says,  "  Learn  of  me,  because  I  am  meek  and 
humble  of  heart."  If  meekness  and  humility  were  more  pre- 
valent at  the  present  day,  this  discussion  had  never  taken  place. 
I  have  been  upwards  of  nine  years  in  the  mission,  and  I  never 
preached  a  controversial  sermon,  unfil  I  found  the  Biblicals 
assailing  my  flock  in  all  quarters — until  I  saw  wolves  in  sheep's 
clothing,  endeavouring  to  lead  them  from  their  faith,  and  car 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY.         137 

rying  on  their  operations  with  a  tract  in  one  hand  and  the  money 
in  the  other — I  then  found  it  necessary  to  stand  forward  and 
protect  the  rehgious  principles  of  that  flock,  over  which  I  wag 
appointed  the  spiritual  guardian  and  guide. 

The  council  of  Trent  never  said,  that  the  merits  of  the  saintR 
can  avail  any  thing  per  se.  They  merely  serve  others  througl 
the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ.  Christ  is  the  door  through  which  we 
shall  enter — He  is  the  vine — we  are  the  branches — and  what- 
ever good  works  we  may  perform,  or  whatever  merits  we  may 
possess,  are  not  to  be  attributed  to  us,  but  to  that  divine  tree 
whence  we  spring,  and  from  which  we  derive  our  life  and  nour- 
ishment. LtJt  every  pastor  take  care  of  his  flock — I  do  not,  in 
that  respect,  invade  the  rights  of  others.  Mr.  Pope  may  say, 
that  he  is  commissioned  to  preach  to  my  flock,  but  I  deny  the 
fact.  I  say  that  he  has  no  ordinary  mission  to  do  so,  and  he 
must  prove  an  extraordinary  mission  by  miracles,  as  Christ  and 
Moses  did.  If  he  have  an  extraordinary  mission,  let  him  give 
us  such  proofs  of  it,  and  I  am  ready  to  join  with  him. 

I  merely  wish  on  this  occasion  to  employ  argument,  not 
rhetoric ;  and  to  appeal,  not  to  your  prejudices  and  passions, 
but  to  the  sober  reflections  of  your  understandings.  If  I  shall 
be  able  to  remove  the  prejudices  of  the  honest  amongst  my 
Protestant  countrymen,  I  shall  consider  myself  as  having 
achieved  much. 

During  the  heat  of  the  Reformation,  it  will  be  allowed  that 
expressions  escaped  from  the  exasperated  parties  on  both  sides, 
which  had  better  been  forgotten.  We  Catholics  may  appeal  to 
the  learned  and  honest  Thorn  dyke,  who  in  his  "  Just  Weights 
and  Measures,"  says, 

"  The  worship  of  the  Host  is  not  idolatry,  for  the  flesh  and  blood  ol  Cnrist 
is  no  idol  to  Christians,  wheresoever  he  is  worshipped.  He  that  worships 
the  Host  beheves  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  be  the  only  true  God,  hyposta- 
tically  united  to  our  flesh  and  blood ;  which  being  present  in  the  Eucharist 
in  such  manner  as  he  is  not  present  every  where,  there  is  due  occasion  to  give 
it  that  worship  in  the  Eucharist,  with  which  the  Godhead  in  our  manhood  is 
to  be  worshipped  with  upon  all  occasions.  Will  any  Papist  acknowledge 
that  he  honours  the  elements  of  the  Eucharist  for  God  ?  Will  common  sense 
charge  him  with  honouring  that  in  the  sacrament  which  he  does  not  believe 
to  be  there  ?  This  is  a  calumny  by  which  Protestants  lead  the  public  by  the 
uose." 

He  subsequently  adds, 

"  They,  that  separate  from  the  church  of  Rome,  as  being  idolatrous,  are 
thereby  schismatics  before  God." 

Mr.  Pope  has  attacked  the  Catholic  clergy  for  receiving 
money  for  saying  masses.  The  Catholic  clergy  depend  for 
support  upon  their  flocks  ;  they  possess  not  the  tithes  and  green 
acres,  and  the  fat  of  th^  land.  Give  them  a  certain  portion  of 
the  tithes  and  glebes,  and  I  promise  you  they  will  never  look  to 

12^ 


l58  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORr. 

the  poor,  even  for  the  most  trifling  compensation  We  read 
that  the  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire,  and  that  he  who  preaches 
the  gospel  should  live  by  the  gospel.  Surely  Mr.  Pope  will  not 
assert  the  contrary. 

Mr.  Pope. — My  opponen  has  acknowledged,  that  they  who 
perished  in  the  flood,  died  in  mortal  sin.  Therefore,  according 
to  Mr.  Maguire's  own  sho\^  ing,  as  those  spirits  were  confined 
in  the  prison  spoken  of  by  St.  Peter,  the  prison  could  not  have 
been  purgatcry.  My  friend  says,  that  the  onus  lies  on  me  to 
prove  that  there  is  not  a  third  place.  I  reply,  that  the  onus  rests 
on  Mr.  Maguire  to  prove  the  existence  of  a  third  place,  and 
also  to  show,  that  that  third  place  is  purgatory.  He  asks,  if 
there  was  the  disposition  to  repent,  would  not  God  forgive  the 
sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost?  Every  one  who  possesses  repen- 
tance towards  God,  and  faith  towards  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is 
accepted  of  him;  but  this  sin,  whatever  it  be,  appears  to  inflict 
the  awful  punishment  of  judicial  blindness.  Mr.  Maguire  has 
himself  admitted,  that  the  sin  is  unpardonable.  I  do  not  decide, 
whether  this  sin  can  be  committed  in  the  present  day  ;  perhaps, 
the  commission  of  it  was  confined  to  the  times  of  the  Saviour — 
Mr.  Maguire  alludes  to  the  cases  of  Lot  and  -of  Jephtha.  I 
answer,  that  the  scriptures,  as  a  faithful  history  of  human  nature, 
must  contain  narratives  of  crime  ;  but  yet,  do  we  ever  find  the 
sacred  volume  speaking  of  acts  of  depravity,  in  language  of 
sanction  and  commendation  ?  Does  the  question  need  a  reply  ? 
The  criminal  act  is  either  pointedly  condemned  in  the  immediate 
context  of  the  narration,  or  by  the  spirit  and  precepts  of  the 
inspired  volume.  But  what  are  we  to  think  of  the  book  oi 
Maccabees,  which  not  merely  relates  an  act  of  suicide  ;  but  pos- 
itively commends  it ;  "  Choosing  rather  to  die  nobly,  Nicanor 
struck  himself  with  his  sword  1"  Is  this  the  authority  of  inspi- 
ration 1  Is  this  bravery,  to  fear  to  meet  death  by  the  arm  of 
another,  and  choose  rather  to  fall  on  his  own  sword  ?  My  friend 
has  alluded  to  circumcision  and  baptism.  I  would  say  of  bap- 
tism, what  Paul  said  of  circumcision : 

"  He  is  not  a  Jew,  which  is  one  outwardly ;  neither  is  that  circumcision 
which  is  outward  in  the  flesh :  but  he  is  a  Jew  which  is  one  inwardly ;  and 
circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the  spirit,  and  not  in  the  letter;  whose 
praise  is  not  of  men,  but  of  God." — Rom.  ii,  28,  29. 

I  believe  that  God  will  never  exclude  a  sinner  from  heaven, 
if  his  dependance  be  founded  upon  the  blood  of  Jesus,  though 
ne  be  not  baptized.  Mr.  Maguire  appears  to  have  a  high 
respect  for  the  Established  church.  I  would  refer  him  to  her 
catechism,  which  says,  that  "  the  sacraments  of  baptism  and  the 
Lord's  supper,  are  genirally  necessary  to  salvation."     Sh^  does 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY.  139 

not  say,  "absolutely  and  essentially."  Mr.  Maguiie  has  said, 
that  the  Redeemer  made  salvation  depend  upon  baptism  as  a 
condition.  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved, 
he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  condemned."  It  does  not  say,  he 
that  is  not  baptized  shall  be  condemned.  Taking  him  on  his 
own  ground,  I  would  ask,  does  he  mean  to  draw  a  parallel 
between  baptism  and  the  excruciating  torments  of  purgatory, 
even  as  conditions  of  salvation  ?  When  the  jailer  at  Philippi 
asked,  what  shall  I  do  to  be  saved  1  St.  Paul  simply  replied 
»'  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved  ;•- 
afterwards  I  admit,  that  he  administered  baptism  as  the  initiating 
right  of  Christian  communion.  My  friend  has  referred  to  the 
Greek  church — the  authority  of  the  Greek  church  weighs  but 
little  with  me.  The  statement  that  the  Greeks  did  not  believe 
'in  purgatory,  was  a  quotation  from  Fisher,  the  Roman  Cathohc 
bishop.  I  omitted  to  notice  one  of  my  friend's  quotations  from 
scripture  in  support  of  purgatory.  The  omission  was  of  little 
consequence,  as  in  truth,  the  passage  is  perfectly  and  altogether 
irrelevant.     I  shall  read  to  you  the  context. 

"We  would  not  have  yofi  ignorant,  brethren,  of  our  tribulation  which  came 
to  us  in  Asia,  that  we  were  pressed  out  of  measure,  above  our  strength,  so 
that  we  were  weary  even  of  life.  But  we  had  in  ourselves  the  answer  of 
death,  that  we  should  not  trust  in  ourselves,  but  in  God  who  raiseth  the  deaa, 
who  hath  delivered,  and  doth  deliver  us  out  of  so  great  dangers  ;  in  whotn 
we  trust  that  he  will  yet  also  deliver  us,  you  helping  withal  in  prayer  for  us; 
that  for  this  gift  obtained  for  us,  by  the  means  of  many  persons,  thanks  may 
be  given  by  many  in  our  behalf." — 2  Cor.  i,  8,  11. 

The  last  verse  which  I  have  read,  is  that  which  my  opponent 
adduced.  Here  is  nothing  about  purgatory  or  prayers  for  the 
dead  ;  were  the  Apostles  on  earth,  or  in  the  world  of  spirits,- 
when  this  verse  was  penned  1  Need  I  offer  any  further  com- 
ment to  show  that  no  connexion  exists  between  this  passage  and 
the  doctrine  of  purgatory. 

The  verse  is  just  as  much  connected  with  purgatory,  as  that 
which  is  commonly  used  as  the  motto  of  purgatorian  societies — 

"  Have  pity  on  me,  have  pity  on  me,  at  least  you  my  friends,  for  the  hand 
of  the  Lord  hath  touched  me."— Job.  xix,  21. 

A  short  time  since  I  placed  in  the  hands  of  a  Roman  Catholic 
a  Douay  Bible,  and  called  his  attention  to  the  passage ;  and 
great  indeed  was  his  astonishment,  when  he  found  that  it  was 
uttered  by  Job,  when  Job  was  on  earth.  My  friend  asked,  why 
David  prayed  for  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins  after  pardon  had 
been  announced  to  him  by  Nathan,  if  his  sins  were  altogether 
blotted  out.  I  answer,  the  Christian  is  conscious  that  the  just 
man  falleth  seven  times  a  day,  and  living  by  faith,  requires  every 
moment  to  cry  out.  "  Purge  me  with  hyssop  and  I  shall  be  cle-un,'* 


140  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

by  reason  of  the  guilt  which  he  is  continually,  and  I  may  per- 
haps say,  sometimes  insensibly,  contracting.  Compare  the 
declaration  of  the  council  of  Trent,  on  the  merit  of  good  works 
already  quoted,  with  the  sacred  volume.     The  Bible  says, 

"  The  wages  of  sin  is  death,  but  the  gift  of  God  is  eternal  life,  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord." — Rom.  vi,  23. 

Here  is  the  council  of  Trent  against  God  himself.  My  friend 
spoke  about  confidence ;  the  confidence  of  which  I  spoke  was 
built  upon  the  blood  of  Christ.  He  desired  those  who  stood  to 
take  heed  lest  they  fall.  I  pray  that  I  may  be  enabled  to  com- 
ply with  the  exhortation,  God  bestowing  upon  me  an  humble 
spirit.     My  opponent  has  stated  that  the  Apostle  says, 

"  No  man  knows  whether  he  be  worthy  of  love  or  hatred." 

I  must  confess  that  I  have  never  met  with  the  passage  in  the 
sacred  scriptures. 

Mr.  Maguire  deprecates  the  idea  of  standing  here  this  day. 
Had  I  not  seen  the  passage  in  the  Register,  which  is  regarded 
as  the  organ  of  Roman  Catholic  proceedings,  this  meeting 
would  never  have  taken  place.  With  respect  to  personaHties  I 
shalltake  no  notice  of  them. 

A  passage  in  the  sixth  JEneid  of  Virgil,  as  translated  by  Diy- 
den,  will  serve  to  throw  light  upon  the  origin  of  purgatory. 

"  Nor  death  itself  can  wholly  wash  their  stains, 

But  lon^  contracted  filth  even  in  the  soul  remains. 

The  relics  of  inveterate  vice  they  wear, 

And  spots  of  sin  obscure  in  every  face  appear ; 

For  this  are  various  penances  enjoined, 

And  some  are  hung  to  bleach  upon  the  wind, 

Some  plunged  in  waters,  others  purged  in  fires, 

'Till  all  the  dregs  are  drained,  and  all  the  rust  expires. 

****** 

Then  are  they  happy,  when  by  length  of  time 
The  scruffis  worn  away,  of  each  committed  crime  j 
No  speck  is  left  of  their  habitual  stains. 
But  the  pure  tether  of  the  soul  remains." 

One  would  think  that  Virgil  saw  prospectively  the  purgatory 
of  the  church  of  Ron>e.  Here  permit  me  to  make  a  remark, 
that  I  cannot  discover,  by  what  process  fire,  which  is  material, 
can  purify  an  immaterial  essence.  I  proceed  to  demonstrate 
from  the  sacred  volume,  in  addition  to  the  arguments  which 
have  been  already  adduced  in  refutation  of  the  doctrine  of  pur- 
gatory, that  the  souls  of  believers  pass  after  death  immediately 
to  everlasting  rest.  If  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  cleanseth  from 
all  sin,  then  assuredly  the  man,  who  has  thus  been  cleansed,  is 
translated  at  once  into  the  realms  of  eternal  glory. 

In  the  fourth  book  of  Kings,  (or,  as  we  have  it,  the  Becond) 
and  twenty-second  chapter,  it  is  written, 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORr.  141 

"  Therefore,  T  will  gather  thee  to  thy  Fathers,  and  thou  shalt  be  gathered 
to  thy  sepulchre  in  peace,  that  thine  eyes  may  not  see  all  the  evils  which  I 
will  bring  upon  this  place." 

I  ask,  would  such  a  promise  have  been  made  to  king  Josiah, 
if  the  soul  was  to  pass  from  the  trials  of  this  world  to  the  agoni- 
zing sufferings  of  a  purgatorial  fire.  In  the  second  of  Corin- 
thians, chap.  V,  1st  to  8th  verse,  the  Apostle  writes : 

"  For  we  know,  if  our  earthly  house  of  this  habitation  be  dissolved,  that  we 
have  a  building  of  God,  a  house  not  made  with  hands,  eternal  in  heaven ; 
for  in  this  also  we  groan,  desiring  to  be  clothed  upon  with  our  habitation  that 
is  from  heaven  ;  yet,  so  that  we  be  found  clothed,  not  naked ;  for  we  also 
who  are  in  the  tabernacle  do  groan,  being  burthened,  because  we  would  not 
be  unclothed,  but  clothed  upon,  that  that  which  is  mortal  may  be  swallowed 
up  by  life.  Now,  he  that  maketh  us  for  this  very  thing  is  God ;  who  hath 
given  us  the  pledge  of  the  Spirit ;  therefore,  having  all  this  confidence,  know- 
ing, that  while  we  are  in  the  body,  we  are  absent  from  the  Lord ;  for  we 
walk  by  faith  and  not  by  sight ;  but  we  are  confident,  and  have  a  good  will 
to  be  absent  rather  from  the  body,  and  to  be  present  with  the  Lord." 

Would  the  Apostle  have  made  use  of  such  language,  if  he 
believed  that  he  had  to  pass  through  a  purgatory  1 

**  To  be  absent  from  the  body"  and  "  to  be  present  with  the 
Lord,"  we  find,  are  in  the  case  of  the  believer,  according  to  the 
Apostle,  synonymous  expressions  :  and  "  in  the  body,"  and 
"  absent  from  the  Lord,"  are  likewise  identified.  The  Apostle 
says,  in  Phihppians  first  chapter  21st  to  23d  verse : 

"  To  me  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain  ;  and  if  to  live  in  the  flesh,  this 
IS  to  me  the  fruit  of  labour  ;  and  what  I  shall  choose  I  know  not ;  but  I  am 
straightened  between  two,  having  a  desire  to  be  dissolved,  and  to  be  with 
Christ,  a  thing  by  far  the  better." 

A  passage  which  is  still  more  direct,  is  found  in  the  thirteenth 
verse  of  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  Revelations  : 

"  And  I  heard  a  voice  from  heaven,  saying  unto  me,  write.  Blessed  are  the 
dead  which  die  in  the  Lord,  from  henceforth ;  yea  saith  the  Spirit,  that  they 
may  rest  from  their  labours,  and  their  works  do  follow  them." 

Why  are  those  who  die  in  the  Lord,  blessed  ?  Is  it,  that, 
delivered  from  the  toils  of  the  flesh,  they  go  to  purgatory  1  Are 
they  blessed,  if  enduring  the  intensity  of  purgatorial  firel  No  ; 
but  through  the  grace  of  God,  when  the  summons  goeth  forth, 
they  are  translated  from  the  changes  and  sorrows  of  this  mortal 
scene  to  the  regions  of  eternal  felicity.  Surely  the  child  of  God, 
instead  of  in  any  degree  looking  forward  to  the  period  of  his 
dissolution  as  the  commencement  of  eternal  blessedness,  if  he 
must  first  pass  through  the  lake  of  purgatorial  fire,  would  doubt- 
less stand  shivering  on  the  brink.  The  people  of  God  whether 
they  live  or  die,  are  the  Lord's.  Would  the  Apostle  assert  that 
the  Lord's  people  are  blessed  after  death,  if  they  had  to  suffer 
in  purgatory  on  their  way  to  glory?  I  have  spoked  on  Mr, 
Maguire's  arguments ;  I  have  considered  his  quotations  fronj 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

scripture,  and  proved  that  they  do  not  support  the  doctrine  of 
purgatory :  I  have  shown  that  such  a  tenet  is  inconsistent  with 
the  character  of  God,  and  derogatory  to  the  Redeemer's  sacri- 
fice. We  have  seen,  upon  the  testimony  of  holy  writ,  that  the 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ  is  perfectly  compet^ent  for  the  salvation 
of  sinners  :  we  have  seen  Fathers  against  Fathers  :  I  trust,  we 
shall  no  longer  repose  implicit  dependance  upon  them.  The 
Bible,  and  the  Bible  alone,  as  the  revelation  of  God,  is  the  word 
by\*vhich  we  shall  be  judged.  That  word  directly  shows  us,  that 
thefsoul  of  the  real  Christian  having  been  emancipated  from  the 
body  passes  immediately  to  a  state  of  felicity.  We  have  also 
seen,  that  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  carries  on  the  very  face  of  it 
a  contradiction  to  the  sacred  scriptures,  in  the  distinction  which 
it  establishes  between  the  rich  and  the  poor.  And  here  I  would 
join  issue  with  one  who  was  well  acquainted  with  the  system  of 
the  church  of  Rome,  a  converted  priest :  and  if  I  use  strong 
expressions,  I  mean  no  offence  to  the  feelings  of  my  Roman 
Catholic  auditors — but  I  would  endeavour  to  reach  the  judgment 
and  the  conscience.     The  writer  to  whom  I  allude  says, 

"  The  doctrine  of  purgatory  is  of  heathen  origin,  intended  to  cheat  the  sim- 
ple out  of  their  money,  by  giving  them  bills  of  exchange  upon  another  world 
for  cash  paid  in  this,  without  any  danger  of  the  bills  returning  protested." — 
Meagher. 

Spare  your  smiles,  my  friends:  the  subject  is  too  momentous : 
it  is  the  salvation  of  the  immortal  and  never-dying  spirit,  on 
which  we  are  discoursing  ;  it  is  the  honor  of  Emmanuel's 
atonement  that  we  are  vindicating.  Will  you  not,  in  agreement 
with  scripture,  give  your  universal  verdict  against  a  doctrine 
which  would  rob  the  believer  of  his  peace,  which  would  throw 
around  the  glorious  attributes  of  heaven's  sovereign,  the  funeral 
pall  of  darkness  and  abscurity,  which  would  transform  a  God  of 
love  into  a  God  of  terror,  mingle  our  paltry  "  satisfactions"  with 
the  agonies  of  Calvary,  and  attach  to  the  seamless  robe  of  Christ's 
righteousness,  woven  from  Bethlehem  to  the  Cross,  the  tattered 
vestments  of  personal  suffering  1  As  to  men  of  sense,  I  appeal 
to  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy.  Though  we  differ,  still,  as  a 
friend,  I  would  say,  "  take  care  lest  you  are  not  bringing  down 
upon  your  heads  the  curses  of  innumerable  immortal  spirits.*' 
We  are  all  on  our  progress  to  an  eternal  world ;  we  must  all 
onward,  whether  we  will  or  not,  to  our  journey's  end  ;  our  pil- 
grimage will  soon  terminate,  and  the  exclusive  objects  of  our 
concern  then  will  be  the  great  realities  of  an  eternal  world.  Let 
us  then,  Protestant  and  Roman  Cathohcs,  while  we  are  on  the 
way,  look  to  Jesus,  the  only  hope  set  before  sinners  ;  let  us  kiss 
the  Son,  lest  he  be  angry,  and  the  door  of  mercy  be  for  ever  closed. 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  14fi 

Mr.  Maguire. — Gentlemen,  after  the  very  pathetic  sermon 
which  you  have  just  heard,  the  feehngs  of  many  of  you  must  be 
in  no  small  degree  excited.  I  shall  merely  observe  that  I  have 
not  come  here  to  preach,  but  to  argue — to  examine  evidence, 
and  expose  sophistry.  Mr.  Pope  has  given  us  a  history  of 
witchcraft  in  the  tenth  century. — It  is  but  a  few  days  ago  that 
several  men  were  tried  in  Bible-reading  England,  for  assaulting 
and  nearly  killing  a  poor  old  woman  under  the  impression  that 
she  was  a  witch.  She  was  supposed  to  have  bewitched  a  colt, 
and  she  was  actually  made  to  go  under  the  colt's  tail  and  pray 
lor  its  health  and  prosperity !  This  occurred  in  England  where 
there  are  ten  Bibles  for  one  head.  Mr.  Pope  calls  the  sin 
against  the  Holy  Ghost  an  act  of  judicial  blindness.  Does  he 
hold  that  for  a  sin  which  a  man  has  committed  fifty  years  before 
his  death,  artd  for  which  he  has  sincerely  repented,  the  gates  of 
heaven  will  be  shut  against  him,  and  he  will  be  condemned  to 
eternal  reprobation  ?  Is  Christ's  blood  to  be  of  no  avail  to  that 
repentant  sinner  ?  Is  such  the  doctrine  of  Mr.  Pope  ?  I  be- 
seech you  all  to  examine  the  New  Testament,  and  you  will  find 
in  almost  every  page  of  it,  a  contradiction  to  such  a  doctrine. 
I  may  here  beg  to  recall  your  senses  which  have  been  floating 
upon  that  magical  hemisphere  created  by  the  wonderful  eloquence 
of  my  friend,  and  direct  your  attention  to  the  arguments  he  has 
advanced.  Mr.  Pope  says  that  the  sacraments  of  the  church 
of  England,  namely,  baptism,  and  the  Lord's  supper,  are  gener^ 
ally  necessary  to  salvation.  Mr.  Pope  should  understand  the 
word  "  generally,"  as  theologians  do,  to  mean  that  in  some 
instances  the  sacraments  may  be  dispensed  with ;  for  martyr- 
dom, in  the  opinion  of  theologians,  suffices  as  a  substitute  for 
baptism.  If  Mr.  Pope  understands  "  generally,"  in  that  sense,  I 
quite  agree  with  him.  But  if  he  denies  that  baptism  is  necessary 
to  all  Christians  who  have  the  opportunity  of  receiving  it,  as  a 
requisite  for  salvation,  I  propose  to  him  the  distinct  text  of 
scripture — 

"  Amen,  I  say  unto  you  except  a  man  be  born  again  of  water  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  he  cannot  have  life  in  him." 

If  the  God  of  heaven  thought  fit  to  appoint  a  third  place  for 
the  purifying  of  souls  from  sin  after  their  departure  from  this 
life,  is  not  Mr.  Pope  guilty  of  blasphemy,  in  thus  calling  the  all- 
wise  God  to  an  account  1  Christ  does  not  derogate  from  the 
efficacy  of  his  own  merits  by  the  establishment  of  a  third  place  ; 
and  the  only  question  is,  was  there  such  a  place  de  facto  esta- 
blished ?  Mr.  Pope  has  argued  all  through  upon  the  assumption 
that  I  believe  that  all  souls  should  go  to  purgatory  in  the  first 
instance — I  hope  on  the  contrary,  that  many  go  direct  to  heaven, 


144  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

and  a  few  comparatively  to  purgatory.  Is  it  not  evident,  that 
if  many  souls  go  directly  to  heaven,  that  does  not  militate  against 
the  doctrine  of  purgatory.  Because  some  souls  should  go  di- 
rectly to  heaven,  it  would  be  foolish  in  the  extreme  to  argue  that 
no  such  place  as  purgatory  existed.  I  challenge  Mr.  Pope  to 
produce  a  single  direct  proof  from  scripture  against  purga.tory. 
Every  passage  which  he  has  quoted  is  perfectly  consistent  with 
the  existence  of  a  third  place. 

Before  I  proceed  further,  let  me  read  to  you  the  following 
passage  from  the  pen  of  that  candid  Protestant  divine,  the  learned 
Dr.  Thorndyke,  in  his  "  Just  Weights  and  Measures."  Speak- 
ing of  the  doctrine  promulgated  by  Luther,  as  to  the  justification 
by  faith  only,  he  says, — 

"Can  it  fall  within  the  sense  of  a  Christian  to  imagine,  that  he  can  be 
restored  by  a  *Lord  have  mercy  on  meV  No,  it  must  cost  him  hot  tears  and 
sighs,  and  groans,  and  extraordinary  prayers,  with  fasting  and  alms.  Those 
who  assure  sinners  of  pardon  and  the  favour  of  God,  with  such  means  of  true 
repentance,  whether  it  be  themselves,  or  their  false  teachers,  plainly  murder 
their  souls." 

Is  not  that  a  strong  passage  against  the  Lutheran  and  Cal- 
vinistic  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  only,  which  has  been 
adopted  by  Mr.  Pope  ?  The  inutility  of  good  works  is  a  pleas- 
ing doctrine  to  promulgate  ; — it  ministers  to  the  passions  of 
mankind,  and  encourages  every  species  of  immorality. 

Mr.  Pope  talked  of  Job,  and  he  stated  that  a  Roman  Catholic 
was  astonished  on  his  telling  him  that  Job  used  the  following 
words,  while  he  was  in  this  life  : — 

"Have  pity  on  me,  have  pity  on  me,  at  least  you  my  friends,  because  the 
hand  of  the  Lord  hath  touched  me." 

I  now  assert  that  generally  speaking,  learned  commentators 
agree,  that  Job  there  speaks  in  the  spirit  of  prophecy  of  himself 
when  dead,  that  his  language  related  to  Jesus  Christ,  whose 
death  on  the  cross  would  redeem  them,  and  that  he  therein 
solicited  the  prayers  of  the  friends  about  him  when  he  departed 
from  this  life.  Such  is  the  sense  in  which  I  find  this  passage 
understood  by  the  learned  commentators.  But  I  had  never 
quoted  the  text  in  support  of  the  doctrine  of  purgatory,  and  Mr. 
Pope  is  therefore  only  building  castles  in  the  air,  for  the  purpose 
of  pulling  them  down.  Is  not  the  doctrine  of  Mr.  Pope,  on  the 
head  of  justification  by  faith,  directly  Calvinistici  He  has  ap- 
peared afraid  to  express  the  opinion  which  he  evidently  enter- 
tains, that  the  blood  of  Christ  is  sufficient  alone  to  save  us  ;  as 
if  our  Saviour  himself  had  not  annexed  to  the  promise  of  salva- 
tion, many  co-operating  conditions,  the  fulfilment  of  which  is 
necessary  on  the  part  of  man — Hear  what  our  Saviour  says, 

"  But  if  thou  wilt  enter  into  heaven  keep  the  commandments.^^ 

"  Unless  you  do  penance  you  shall  all  likewise  oerish." — Matthew,  xix,  17 


THE     DOCTRINE     OF    PURGATORY.  145 

I  have  already  proved  that  the  word  /usTavoia  was  used  in 
reference  to  the  repentance  of  the  men  of  Nineveh,  and  that 
repentance  we  are  told  in  scripture,  consisted  of  the  works  of 
penance,  fasting,  and  similar  mortifications. 

I  defy  any  Protestant,  who,  like  Mr.  Pope,  manitains  the  right 
of  private  judgment,  to  prove  that  the  Bible  is  the  inspired  word 
of  God.  The  Protestant  must  take  it  upon  trust  from  the 
Catholic  church.  They  receive  the  sacred  scriptures  from  a 
church  whose  authority  they  refuse  to  acknowledge. 

Mr.  Pope  has  again  recurred  to  the  origin  of  the  present  dis- 
cussion, and  repeated  that  the  passage  in  the  speech  published 
ia  the  Register, 'first  gave  occasion  to  it.  Mr.  Pope  has  spoken 
t^o  of  that  paper  being  the  organ  of  the  Catholic  body — that 
may  be  true, — but  I  will  here  say  that  the  editor  of  the  Register 
had  nothing  to  do  with  the  speech  in  question.  He  should  not 
be  held  responsible  for  it,  unless  it  had  been  given  in  by  the 
gentleman  who  furnishes  the  regular  reports  for  that  journal. 
I  have  already  disclaimed  the  accuracy  of  the  report  in  question. 
I  have  on  the  first  day,  stated  to  this  assembly,  how  Mr.  Pope's 
challenge  was  sent  round  in  green  bags  through  my  parish,  and 
that  a  copy  of  it  was  served  regularly  upon  me  at  breakfast  after 
mass  in  the  presence  of  several  Protestants.  Let  Mr.  Pope 
employ  what  arguments  he  may  think  fit  against  my  creed.  I 
shall  not  descend  to  personalities — even  if  he  make  a  parcel  of 
crabs  crawl  across  this  table,  and  state  that  they  are  souls  on 
their  journey  to  purgatory.  I  shall  not  accuse  him  of  person- 
ality. Mr.  Pope  forsooth  has  made  a  noble  discovery.  He 
proves  from  a  passage  taken  from  the  sixth  book  of  YirgiPs 
_^neid,  that  the  Catholic  church  has  stolen  the  idea  of  purgatory 
from  the  pagan  mythology.  Virgil  likewise  speaks  of  hell. 
Will  Mr.  Pope  say  that  the  doctrine  of  hell  has  been  also  stolen 
from  the  mythology  of  the  heathens  ]  I  think  I  may  make  him 
a  full  present  of  the  notable  argument  which  he  has  founded 
upon  the  sixth  book  of  the  -3Eneid. 

Mr.  Pope  says,  that  he  cannot  conceive  how  the  fire  of  pur- 
sgatory  can  act  upon  immaterial  souls.  This  was  precisely  the 
objection  started  by  Voltaire  against  the  doctrine  of  hell — namely, 
/\hat  fire  could  not  act  upon  the  human  soul.  That  celebrated 
infidel,  therefore,  contended  that  the  soul  must  be  annihilated 
after  its  separation  from  the  body  ;  and  he  ridiculed  as  incon- 
sistent and  absurd,  the  doctrine  of  future  rewards  and  punish- 
ments. The  shade  of  Voltaire  will,  no  doubt,  feel  extremely 
obliged  to  Mr.  Pope. 

Mr.  Pope  eternally  recurs  to  the  merits  of  the  Redeemer's 
blood,  in  order  to  throw  dust  in  the  eyes  of  his  hearers.  There 
is  not  a  man  on  earth  places  more  dependance  than  I  do  upon 

13 


146  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

the  sacred  blood  of  our  divine  Redeemer.  I  feel  that  my  eter- 
nal salvation  is  a  doubtful  matter,  but  I  hold,  with  the  Catholic 
church,  that  the  merits  of  Christ's  blood  have  out-balanced  all 
sin.  I  believe  that  millions  will  be  blessed  in  the  Redeemer's 
nanne.  Mr.  Pope  insists  that  the  doctrine  of  the  utility  of  good 
works  detracts  from  the  merits  of  Christ's  sacrifice.  1 1  remains 
for  Mr.  Pope  to  show  that  sin  is  sanctioned  by  heaven  :  or  that 
because  good  works  are  rewarded  by  our  Saviour,  he  therefor©  , 
derogates  from  his  own  infinite  merits.  We  believe  that  all  men 
who  are  saved  are  saved  alone  through  the  merits  of  Christ. 
As  it  is  not  derogatory  to  Christ  to  be  an  intercessor  with  the 
Father,  neither  is  it  derogatory  to  Christ  to  have  intercessors 
under  him.  Mr.  Pope's  attempt  to  throw  discredit  upon  the  holy 
Fathers  does  not  look  well  for  his  cause.  I  beg  you  to  recollect 
the  argument  which  I  proposed  respecting  the  Fathers — and 
which  argument,  as  Mr.  Pope  has  not  condescended  to  notice  it, 
I  shall  here  repeat — either  the  Fathers  in  their  writings  published 
what  was  the  acknowledged  doctrine  of  the  church  or  they  did 
not.  If  they  did  publish  the  established  doctrine  of  the  church, 
Mr.  Pope  must  give  up  the  first  ages  of  Christianity,  and  the  first 
councils,  and  admit  that  there  never  was  a  period  when  such  doc- 
trine was  not  taught  by  the  church.  If  the  doctrines  promulga- 
ted by  the  Fathers  were  not  those  entertained  by  the  church,  w  by 
did  not  the  church  then  disclaim  them,  and  condemn  their  opin- 
ions ?  Why  did  not  the  heretics  quote  the  Fathers,  as  opposed 
to  the  Catholic  church  1  Mr.  Pope  has  given  some  quotations 
from  the  Fathers.  As  soon  as  the  substance  of  the  present  con- 
troversy is  drawn  up  and  duly  authenticated,  I  shall  repair  to  the 
library  at  Manchester,  and  there  examine  the  genuine  editions 
of  the  Fathers,  in  order  to  ascertain  the  authenticity  and  correct- 
ness of  the  quotations  read  by  Mr.  Pope.  The  quotations  w  hich 
he  has  given  are  taken  upon  second  hand  authority.  He  has 
had  them,  I  believe  ehsielricanie  manu. 

My  quotations  remain  uncontroverted  and  incontrovertible.  I 
would  recall  the  attention  of  all  candid  Protestants  present  to 
this  fact,  that  I  have  proved  my  doctrine  by  three  distinct  pas- 
sages from  scripture,  which  have  not  been  explained  by  my  op- 
ponent— I  have  quoted  Fathers  who  adduce  the  same  texts  of 
scripture  in  support  of  the  doctrine  of  purgatory.  Were  Jerome, 
Augustine,  Cyprian,  Tertullian,  and  Origen,  down  to  the  fifth 
century,  all  wrong  in  their  opinions  on  this  subject  ?  Will  you 
prefer  the  private  judgment  of  Mr.  Pope  before  the  unanimous 
consent  of  the  holy  Fathers  and  the  authority  of  the  church  1 

Dr.  Johnson,  one  of  the  greatest  men  that  England  ever  saw,     < 
admitted  the  reasonableness  of  the  doctrine  of  purgatory.     IIu 
acknowledged  that  it  was  a  holy  and  reasonable  doctrir  f,  and  h« 


THE    DOCTRIJNE    OF    PURGATORY.  147 

Rcrordingly  offered  up  prayers  for  the  departed  soul  of  his  mother. 
What  Dr.  Johnson  held  and  acknowledged,  few  Protestants  need 
be  ashamed  of. 

Negative  proofs  alone  were  those  to  which  Mr.  Pope  has  had 
recourse.  I  have  advanced  no  position  in  proof  of  the  doctrine 
of  purgatory,  which  I  have  not  founded  upon  at  least  two  direct 
and  positive  texts  of  scripture.  I  have  also  brought  forward 
the  holy  Fathers  in  support  of  the  doctrine  which  I  maintain.  I 
have  proved  that  all  antiquity  concurred  in  giving  the  same  mean- 
ing which  I  now  give,  to  the  texts  of  scripture  which  I  have 
quoted.  It  must  be  acknowledged,  even  by  Protestants,  that 
those  holy  Fathers,  who  lived  immediately  after  the  Apostles,  and 
many  of  whoni  are  canonized  saints,  form  a  great  and  powerful 
authority,  as  to  t^e  doctrines  of  the  church  in  the  early  ages  o{ 
Christianity.  Mr.  Pope  will  not  admit  the  authority  of  the 
church,  nor  will  he  give  credit  to  the  collective  wisdom  of  the 
holy  Fathers. 

We  read,  that  God  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his 
works.  If  God  plunges  a  man,  for  an  idle  word,  into  hell  for  all 
eternity,  where  will  a  place  be  found  for  Antichrist,  or  for  Nero, 
Caligula,  Domitian,  and  the  other  monsters  of  vice  who  have 
disgraced  the  human  form  ]  Where  is  a  place  of  adequate  pun- 
ishment to  be  found  for  them,  if  a  man  be  condemned  everlast- 
ingly for  the  expression  of  a  single  idle  word  1  Yet  we  read  in 
St.  John  the  words  of  our  Lord,  that 

"  Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  shall  not 
enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 

Is  the  doctrine  propounded  by  Mr.  Pope  consistent  with  the 
justice  and  mercy  of  God  ?  Protestants  should  beware  of  the 
doctrine  that  asserts  they  must  go  directly  and  at  once  either  to 
heaven  or  hell.  The  alternative  is  a  dreadful  one,  and  obviously 
does  not  consist  with  the  goodness  and  mercy  of  God. 

It  is  evident  that  the  texts  of  Scripture  are  on  my  side.  Has 
Mr.  Pope  quoted  a  single  text  directly  against  the  doctrine  which 
I  advocate,  or  in  contradiction  to  the  texts  whicn  I  have  read  to 
you  ]     Weigh  that  fact  in  your  minds. 

Mr.  Pope  has  attempted  to  cast  discredit  upon  the  utility  of 
good  works.  Now  I  ask  him,  how  can  a  merciful  God  punish  ?ne 
eternally,  for  bad  works,  if  he  will  give  me  no  credit  for  my  good 
ones  1  I  had  been  led  to  believe  that  the  giving  of  even  a  cup 
of  cold  water  should  have  its  reward.  I  have  already  stated 
that  good  works  avail  not  jter  se,  but  through  the  infinite  merits 
of  our  Redeemer,  who  will  reward  the  efforts  of  poor  man,  to 
co-operate  with  divine  grace,  in  the  atonement  for  his  manifest 
Transgressions. 


148         THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY. 

Mr.  Pope — As  to  the  sermon  which  my  learned  opponent 
accuses  me  of  preaching,  it  originated  from  the  fact,  that  there 
were  no  arguments  to  which  I  had  to  reply.  He  has,  indeed, 
dealt  in  broad  assertions,  but  not  in  argument,  Mr.  Maguire  has 
much  objected  to  the  expression,  "judicial  blindness."  He 
should  ren  ember,  that  the  constitution  of  the  mind  is  framed  by 
the  God  of  mind.  When  we  habitually  resist  the  convictions 
of  our  judgments,  the  darkness  of  the  understanding  is  increased, 
so  that  at  length  we  cannot  discover  truth  from  falsehood  :  this 
is  judicial  blindness.  If  it  he  the  fact  that  so  few  go  to  purgatory^ 
as  JVfr.  Maguire  asserts,  then  I  hope  that  the  number  of  masses 
for  souls  suffering  in  purgatory  icill  be  in  proportion  diminished. 
I  brought  forward  the  passage  from  Job,  as  equalling  in  irrelev- 
ancy, Mr.  Maguire's  quotation  from  2  Cor.  i,  11.  My  opponent 
has  asserted,  that  we  are  indebted  for  the  holy  scriptures  to  the 
church  of  Rome.  I  deny  the  position.  Were  there  not  various 
churches  beside  the  church  of  Rome?  Has  my  friend  never 
heard  of  the  Greek,  the  Abyssinian,  the  Chaldean,  the  Syrian,  or 
the  Waldensian  churches  ?  These  all  possessed  the  scriptures. 
To  employ  an  illustration,  which  I  have  used  on  other  occasions. 
If  I  desired  a  draught  of  water,  and  six  or  seven  streams  flowing 
towards  me,  should  go  and  plunge  my  vessel  into  the  nearest 
stream,  I  may  be  thus  addressed  by  the  proprietor  of  one  of  the 
rivulets  : — "  Sir,  you  are  entirely  dependant  on  me  for  water, 
but  you  shall  not  draw  it  from  this  stream  ;  it  belongs  to  me." 
I  might  reply,  "  I  am  not  exclusively  indebted  to  you  or  depen- 
dant upon  your  fountain  :  there  are  five  or  six  other  streams  at 
hand  ;  youmay,  if  you  please,  debar  me  of  access  to  your  well, 
but  I  can  put  my  bucket  into  other  sprhigs,  and  take  a  refresh- 
ing draught.," 

Mr.  Maguire  remarks,  that  my  observation  on  the  incompe- 
tency of  material  fire  to  purge  an  immaterial  spirit,  coincides 
with  that  of  Voltaire.  I  hold,  that  although  a  spirit  cannot  suffer 
from  material  substance,  it  can  be  taught  to  suffer  by  being 
brought  into  contact  with  spirit.  When  the  spirit  is  re-united  to 
the  corporeal  frame,  then  the  body  may  suffer  from  material  lire. 
My  opponent  says,  that  the  Fathers  in  the  quotations,  which  he 
adduced  relative  to  purgatory,  either  gave  the  mind  of  the  church 
or  they  did  not :  if  they  did  not,  why  did  not  the  church  protest 
against  them  :  if  they  did  give  the  mind  of  the.  church,  why  is 
not  the  doctrine  which  he  says  they  propound,  received  1  In  reply, 
I  say,  that  the  quotations  from  the  Fathers,  which  I  have  adduced 
in  refutation  of  purgatory,  either  gave  the  mind  of  the  church, 
or  they  did  not :  if  they  did  not,  why  were  they  not  protested 
against ;  if  they  did,  why  is  not  the  doctrine  received  which  they 
suj>port?     Therefore,  we  have  Fathers  against  Fathers. 


THE     DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY.  149 

My  opponent  asked  questions  in  the  last  half  hour  yesterday 
when  he  knew  they  could  not  be  replied  to.  He  has  said  that  I 
have  not  given  my  rule  of  faith.  I  beg  to  be  permitted  to  deny 
this  assertion.  I  again  and  again  stated,  that  the  bibie  is  my 
RULE  OF  FAITH.  1  never  asserted  that  God  suffered.  Christ 
suffered  not  in  his  divinity,  but  in  his  human  nature  :  and  the 
union  of  deity  with  manhood,  stamped  an  infinite  value  upon  his 
sufferings.  I  shall  now  proceed  to  prove  the  inspiration,  canon- 
icity,  integrity,  authenticity,  and  genuineness  of  the  sacred  vol- 
ume. From  the  short  time  allowed,  I  shall  be  under  the  necessity 
of  condensing  my  remarks  within  a  small  compass.  I  would 
first  ask,  how  does  the  church  of  Rome  decide  upon  these  ques- 
tions ?  Is  it  by  inspiration?  My  opponent,  I  am  convinced, 
does  not  entertain  such  an  opinion.     It  is  then  on  evidence  ; 

AND  IS  NOT  evidence    TANGIBLE  TO  OTHERS    AS    WELL    AS    TO 

THE  CHURCH  OF  RoME  ]  My  friend  has  made  an  observation 
to  this  effect,  that  I  disregarded  aggregate  wisdom.  The  asser- 
tion, permit  me  to  say,  is  unfounded.  I  deny  not,  that  in  the 
multitude  of  counsellors  there  is  safety.  Surely  the  wisdom  of 
a  collective  body  may  be  serviceable,  though  not  endowed  with 
the  prerogative  of  infalHbihty. — As  to  the  inspiration  of  the  sys- 
tem, revealed  in  scripture  :  all  are  convinced  that  we  need  a 
revelation.  The  light  of  nature  can  in  no  wise  discover  to  us  a 
plan,  by  which  the  Deity,  in  perfect  harmony  with  his  unchang- 
ing perfections,  can  pardon  guilty  man.  Socrates  looked  for 
such  a  revelation.  The  law  of  opinion  is  continually  fluctuating, 
and  does  not  furnish  an  immutable  standard  of  morals.  Do  we 
not  want  something  to  cheer  and  console  us  amidst  the  vicissi- 
tudes and  troubles  of  life  1  When  we  look  beyond  the  portals 
of  the  grave,  do  we  not  require  a  ray  of  truth  to  illuminate  the 
darkness  of  the  tomb  1  By  nature  we  know  little  of  God,  little 
of  ourselves,  little  of  our  destinies^  Here  is  a  volume  which 
purports  to  be  a  revelation  from  heaven.  I  study  it,  and  find  in 
it  a  sublime  display  of  the  divine  perfections,  a  scheme  of  redemp- 
iK>n  perfectly  adapted  to  my  circumstances,  a  perfect  code  of 
morals,  a  system  whose  tendency  is  to  diffuse  happiness  on  earth, 
and  to  smooth  the  rugged  brow  of  death  ;  so  that  the  volume 
bears  upon  its  very  front  the  broad  impress  of  heaven.  I  find 
that  it  has  condensed  the  fragments  of  truth  that  are  scattered 
through  the  world,  into  a  glorious  whole.  I  find  that  it  explains 
the  mazes  and  labyrinths  of  life,  and  brings  glory  to  God  in  the 
highest,  and  speaks  peace  on  earth,  good  will  towards  men.  Its 
two  great  divisions,  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  contain  prophe 
cies  which  have  been  fulfilled  in  the  destruction  of  kingdoms, 
and  in  events  which  history  has  recorded.  The  Jews  are  scat- 
tered throughout  the  world,  and  are  still  a  distinct  people.  Lord 

13* 


150  THE     DOCTRINE     OF    PURGATORY. 

Chesterfield,  with  all  his  infidelity  was  obliged  to  say,  that  he 
never  could  get  over  the  state  of  the  Jews  as  a  testimony  to  the 
truth  of  scripture.  From  what  origin  could  such  a  system  have 
sprung?  It  could  never  have  emanated  from  the  schools  of 
antiquity.  The  schools  were  incapable  of  discovering  the  char- 
acter of  God,  or  of  devising  such  a  scheme  of  morals.  Ancient 
philosophers  were,  comparatively,  children  on  the  subject  of 
moral  obligation.  If  philosophy  could  not  impart  such  truth, 
we  must  look  to  some  other  source,  and  I  find — that  source  is 
heaven.  What  object,  I  would  ask,  could  the  ♦  Apostles  have 
had  m  attempting  to  deceive  mankind  ?  Was  it  temporal  inter- 
est? No — they  exposed  themselves  to  persecution  and  death. 
When,  therefore,  I  find  the  system  which  they  have  revealed, 
according  with  the  voice  of  nature,  adapted  to  the  circumstan- 
ces of  man,  accurately  describing  his  character,  and  palpably 
embodying  in  itself  the  attributes  of  Jehovah,  I  cannot  avoid 
asking, 

"  Whence,  but  from  heaven,  should  men  unskilled  in  arts, 

In  different  ages  born,  in  different  parts, 

Weave  such  agreeing  truths,  or  how,  or  why, 

Should  all  conspire  to  cheat  us  with  a  lie. 

Unasked  their  pains,  ungrateful  their  advice, 

Starving  their  gains,  and  martyrdom  their  price  ?" — Drtden. 

Having  made  these  observations  on  the  inspiration  of  the  sys- 
tem contained  in  the  sacred  records,  I  beg  to  remark,  that  the 
man  convinced  that  the  system  is  divine,  does  not  experience 
much  difficulty  respecting  the  canon  of  scripture.  The  illiterate 
person  never  troubles  himself  upon  the  subject.  He  finds  a 
balm  for  his  sorrows  in  the  word  of  life — a  medicine  for  his  soul, 
drawn  from  the  laboratory  of  truth,  prepared  by  the  great  Phy- 
sician of  Souls.  As  to  the  canonicity  of  the  sacred  volume  : 
what  is  the  evidence  respecting  any  work,  such  as  Virgil  or 
Horace,  but  the  testimony  of  the  ancients  1  This  testimony  is 
infinitely  more  conclusive  in  support  of  the  sacred  scriptures. 
We  shall  commence  with  the  fourth  century,  (it  being  unneces- 
sary to  begin  with  the  writers  of  a  later  period)  and  take  you 
through  successive  witnesses  up  to  the  first  century,  when  we 
have  the  five  Apostolic  Fathers.  Allow  me  to  trespass  upon 
your  attention  by  mentioning  the  names  of  some  of  the  writers. 
In  the  fourth  century,  we  have  numerous  quotations  from  the 
New  Testament  in  the  writings  of  St.  Athanasius,  Ephiphanius, 
Jerome,  Rufinus,  Augustin,  Eusebius,  and  Cyril,  Gregory  Na- 
zienzen,  Philaster,  Arnobius,  Lactantius,  and  others.  In  the 
third  century,  we  find  various  passages  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment, occurring  in  the  writings  of  Novatus,  Dionysius,  Commo- 
dian,  Auatolius,  Theognostus,  Methodius,  Phileas,  \ictorinu.s, 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  PURGATORY.         151 

Cyprian,  Caius,  and  others.  In  the  second  century,  Tertulhan, 
Clemens  Alexandrinus,  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  Athenagoras, 
Irenaeus  of  Lyons,  Melito,  Tatian,  Hegesippus,  Justin  Martyr, 
and  Papias,  contain  numerous  references  to  the  New  Testament. 
This  chain  of  evidence  brings  us  to  the  five  Apostohc  Fathers: 
Barnabas,  Clemens,  Romanus,  Hermas,  Ignatius  and  Polycarp. 
In  the  fourth  century  we  have  catalogues  of  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  made  by  St.  Athanasius,  (39  Ep.  Fest.  t.  i,  p. 
961,  E.  962,  C.)  Jerome,  (De  Stud.  Script,  ad  Paul  in.  ep.  50, 
al.  103,  t.  iv,  p.  2,  p.  574,  ed.  Bened.)  Rufmus,  (Expos.  Symb. 
Apost.)  Augustin,  (De  Doctr.  Christ.  1.  2,  cap.  viii,  n.  12, 13, 
14,  torn,  iii,  p.  1,  Benedict.)  and  Epiphanius,  (Panar.  h.  76,  p. 
941.)  most  accurately  agreemg  with  the  present  received  canon. 
If  this  evidence  be  sufficient  to  satisfy  every  candid  man,  as 
to  the  canonicity  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  that  por- 
tion of  the  sacred  oracles  will  enable  us  to  conclude  respecting 
the  canonicity  of  the  books  of  the  Oltl.  Almost  all  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  are  quoted  in  the  New,  as  may  be  seen 
by  consulting  the  short  appendix  to  Canne's  Bible.  The  Jews, 
as  I  have  already  stated,  did  not  receive  the  apocrypha.  The 
passage  to  that  effect  from  Bellarmine,  is  as  follows  : 

"  Omnes  libros  quos  Protestantes  non  recipiunt,"  &c. 
"  All  the  books  which  the  Protestants  do  not  receive,  the  Jews  also  do  not 
admit." — Lib.  i,  De  verb.  Dei.  c.  10,  principio  et  sect  ad  locum. 

In  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  Compultenstian 
Polyglot  was  published  by  Ximenes,  Cardinal  and  Archbishop 
of  Toledo,  in  Spain.  In  the  preface  to  the  reader,  there  is  a 
special  admonition  given,  that  the  books  of  Tobit,  Judith,  Wis- 
dom, Ecclesiasticus  and  the  Maccabees,  with  the  additions  to 
Esther,  which  are  set  forth  in  the  Greek  onlijj  are  not  canonical 
scripture.     The  words  are  these — 

"  But  the  books  without  the  canon,  which  the  church  receives  rather  for  the 
edification  of  the  people,  than  for  confirming  the  authority  of  ecclesiastical 
dogmas,  are  given  in  Greek  only,  but  with  a  double  interpretation." 

About  this  time,  the  Vulgate  Bible  with  Lira's  commentary 
and  the  ordinary  gloss,  was  printed  at  Basil ;  in  the  preface  we 
read  as  follows  : 

"  Since  there  are  many,  who  because  they  do  not  bestow  attention  upon  the 
sacred  scriptures,  suppose  that  all  the  books  which  are  contained  in  the  Bible, 
are  to  be  venerated  with  like  respect,  not  knowing  how  to  distinguish  between 
canonical  and  uncanonical  books,  (which  the  Jews  reckon  amongst  the  apoc- 
rypha) from  whence  they  often  appear  ridiculous  to  the  learned,  therefore,  we 
have  distinguished  and  distinctly  enumerated,  first,  the  canonical  books,  and 
afterwards  the  uncanonical  ;  between  which  there  is  as  much  difTerence,  as 
between  that  which  is  certain  and  that  which  is  dubious  ;  for  the  canonical 
books  were  composed  by  the  dictation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  it  is  not  known 
9t  10 hat  time,  or  hy  what  authors  the  uncanonical^  or  in  fther  words ^  the  apocry^ 


152  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    PURGATORY. 

vhal  bioks  were  set  forth;  but  the  canonical  books  are  of  so  great  autlioritj, 
that  whatsoever  is  there  contained,  the  church  holds  as  true,  firmly  and  with- 
out question." 

Permit  me  to  add,  that  the  Redeemer,  who  pointedly  censured 
the  Jews  for  making  void  the  word  of  God  by  their  traditions, 
would  still  have  strongly  condemned  them,  if  they  had  left  out  of 
their  canon  any  part  of  the  word  of  God. 

With  respect  to  the  uncorrupted  preservation  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, let  us  bear  in  mind  the  great  care  with  which  the  Jews 
preserved  it.  Philo  Judseus  informs  us,  that  the  Jews  regarded 
the  Old  Testament  with  such  profound  veneration,  that  they  even 
counted  the  letters,  that  they  discarded  a  copy  which  contained 
a  single  error,  and  would  rather  lose  their  lives  than  alter  the 
original  in  the  slightest  degree. — (Philo.  ap.  Euseb.  de.  Praep. 
Evang.  lib.  viii,  c.  2.)  How  could  the  Old  Testament  have  been 
adulterated  previously  to  the  Saviour  ?  The  Jews  were  divided 
into  sects.  The  Talmudists  and  the  Caraites  would  naturally 
watch  over  their  common  scripture  with  jealousy.  Could  the 
Samaritans  have  been  prevailed  upon  to  unite  with  the  Jews  in 
corrupting  the  Pentateuch'^  After  the  commencement  of  the 
Christian  era,  the  Old  Testament  was  in  the  hands  of  Christians 
as  well  as  Jews.  Had  the  Jews  left  out  any  portion  of  the 
Old  Testament,  would  they  not  have  omitted  the  passages  which 
condemned  the  conduct  of  their  leaders,  which  speak  of  the 
dolatries  of  the  people  as  sanctioned  by  their  priesthood,  and 
which  predict  tlieir  treatment  of  the  Messiah  'I  but  these  are  still 
found  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  quotations  from  the  Old 
Te'stament  in  the  Fathers  coincide  with  the  same  passages  as 
they  stand  in  our  Bible  :  from  this  fact  also  we  infer,  that  the 
Old  Testament  has  not  been  corrupted  since  their  time.  The 
New  Testament  has  been  dispersed  in  different  countries.  The 
^^ariety  of  sects  which  have  existed,  watched  it  with  such  jealous 
care,  that  none  could  have  mutilated  it.  We  have  many  ancient 
translations.  Drs.  Kennicott  and  Bentley  have  examined 
numberless  manuscripts,  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 
Dr.  Bentley,  speaking  of  the  various  readings,  says, 

"  I,  for  my  part,  and,  as  I  believe,  many  others,  would  not  lament,  if  out  o\ 
the  old  MSS.  yet  untouched,  10,000  more  were  faithfully  collected  ;  some  di 
which,  without  question,  would  render  the  text  more  beautiful,  just  and  exact; 
though  of  no  consequence  to  the  main  of  religion  .  nay,  perhaps,  wholly  syn» 
onymous  in  the  view  of  common  readers,  and  quite  insensible  in  any  modem 
version." — Piiilaleuth.  Lipsieus.  p.  90. 

These  are  proofs  which  must  satisfy  every  candid  inquirer,  as 
to  the  canonicity  and  uncorrupted  preservation  of  the  sacred 
volume. 

I  pass  on  rapidly  to  my  proofs  of  the  authenticity  of  scripture. 
The  primitive  Christian  Fathers,  and  others  were  competent 


THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF    THE    REFORMATION.       153 

judges  as  to  matters  of  fact.  And  can  we  believe,  that  so  many 
would  have  deserted  the  schools  of  philosophy,  enrolled  them- 
selves amongst  the  persecuted  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
have  suffered  martyrdom  itself,  if  they  had  not  been  convinced, 
upon  sound  evidence,  of  the  authenticity  of  the  facts  recorded 
in  the  inspired  volume  ?  With  respect  to  the  genuineness  of  the 
New  Testament  :  contrast  the  several  books  ;  mark  the  coin- 
cidence between  the  history  of  the  writers  and  their  respective 
writings  ;  observe  the  style  of  each — the  gospel  of  St.  Luke  is 
of  purer  Greek  than  the  others — this  circumstance  is  accounted 
for  by  the  fact,  that  Luke  was  a  physician,  and  consequently 
possessed,  it  is  presumed,  some  share  of  learning.  We  have 
many  Hebraisms  and  Syriacisms  in  the  New  Testament,  by 
which  we  know  that  the  writers  were  Jews  ;  for  their  thoughts 
being  transfused  into  Greek,  the  diction  contracted  a  tincture 
from  the  medium  through  which  they  passed.  On  the  other 
hand,  but  few  of  the  Fathers  knew  any  thing  of  Hebrew. 

Allow  me  here  to  remark,  that  in  thus  appealing  to  the  mere 
evidence  of  historical  testimony — I  am  not  departing  from  my 
principles.  The  "  modus  tradendi,"  the  mode  of  handing  down,, 
and  the  "  res  tradita,"  the  thing  handed  down,  are  altogether 
different.  Cardinal  Bellarmine  mentions  the  evidences  by  which 
a  book  is  known  to  be  canonical,  "  first,  from  the  testimonials  ot 
the  ancients — secondly,  from  its  likeness  and  agreement  wirh  the 
other  books — thirdly,  from  the  common  sense  and  taste  of  Chris- 
tian people." — De  Verb.  Dei.  1.  c.  10. 

"  He  that  is  spiritual  judgeth  things,"  says  the  Apostle  Paul, 
1  Cor.  ii,  15.  Let  the  man  of  a  spiritual  mind,  read  the 
apocrypha,  and  his  taste  and  feeling  will  nauseate  much  that  is 
contained  therein  ;  nor  will  he  find  the  same  spirit  in  them  which 
pervades  the  books  of  holv  writ. 


Fourth  Day. — Monday,  April  23. 


SUBJECT. — "  The  Justification  of  the  Reformation.''^ 

Admiral  Oliver  and  Christopher  Fitzsimon,  Esq.,  in 
the  chair. 

Mr.  Maguire  rose,  and  called  on  Mr.  Pope  to  justify  the 
Reformers. 

Mr.  Pope. — Mr.  Maguire  has  called  upon  me  for  a  justitica- 
tion  of  the  Reformers  :  but  permit  me  to  remind  you,  genilem'^iv 


154  THE    JUSTIFICATION     OF 

tliiit  1  stand  up  on  the  present  occasion  to  justify  the  separation 
from  the  Church  of  Rome  which  took  place  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  16th  century.  I  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood, 
that  I  stand  not  here  to  vindicate  every  act  of  the  reformers  :  it 
is  the  separation  fi'om  the  church  of  Rome  which  I  am  to  justify. 
If  I  were  for  a  moment  to  admit  (which  I  by  no  means  do)  that 
the  reformers  were  the  most  abandoned  characters  upon  earth — 
if,  for  argument's  sake,  I  were  to  make  this  concession,  it  would 
not  interfere  with  the  question  before  us,  which  is — were  the 
reformers  justified  in  separating  from  the  church  of  Rome  in  the 
16th  century?  The  reformers,  His  true,  had  their  failings  like 
other  men  ;  but  this  is  to  be  accounted  for,  partly  from  the  natural 
weakness  of  human  nature,  and  partly  from  the  influence  of  the 
system  which  they  had  just  abandoned.  It  is  difficult  for  a  per- 
son, long  accustomed  to  habits  of  indolence  and  profligacy, 
instantaneously  to  engage  in  the  activities  of  life — at  once  to 
shakQ^  oflT  the  chrysalis,  and  stand  forth  in  all  the  beauty  and 
proportion  of  moral  rectitude.  Suppose  that  you  had  been  con- 
fined in  a  gloomy  dungeon  for  twenty  or  thirty  y«ars  ;  when  first 
you  are  led  forth  to  enjoy  the  light  and  liberty  of  heaven,  is  it 
not  natural  to  think,  that  you  could  not  for  some  time  enjoy  the 
perfect  exercise  of  your  visual  organs  1 

I  would  justify  the  separation  from  the  church  of  Rome  upon 
two  grounds  :  the  first  is,  the  degraded  moral  character 
OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  RoME  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation  ; 
and  the  second  is,  the  unscriptural  nature  of  the  peculiar 
DOCTRINES  OF  THAT  CHURCH.  As  to  the  moral  character  of 
the  church  of  Rome,  I  might  only  refer  you  to  the  quotations 
which  I  have  already  adduced  ;  but  to  these  I  beg  to  add  some 
others.  You  will  bear  in  mind  that  they  are  the  testimonies  of 
Roman  Catholic  writers. 

Cardinal  Baronius  says,  in  the  close  of  the  10th  century  : — 

"  What  then  was  the  face  of  the  Roman  church  ?  How  very  filthy,  when 
ihe  most  powerful  and  sordid  harlots  then  ruled  at  Rome,  at  whose  pleasure, 
sees  were  changed,  and  bishoprics  were  given,  and — which  is  horrible  to  hear, 
and  most  abominable — their  gallants  were  obtruded  into  the  see  of  Peter,  and 
made  false  popes  ;  for  who  can  say  they  could  be  lawful  Popes,  who  were 
obtruded  by  such  harlots  without  law  ?  There  was  no  mention  of  the  election 
or  consent  of  clergy  ;  the  canons  were  silent,  the  decrees  of  Popes  suppressed, 
the  ancient  traditions  proscribed, — lust,  armed  with  the  secular  power,  chal- 
lenged all  things  to  itself. —  ****** 
♦             ♦             *             **  *  *  *.  *  ¥ 

What  kind  of  Cardinals,  do  you  imagine,  must  be  then  chosen  by  those  mon- 
sters, when  nothing  is  so  natural  as  for  like  to  beget  like?  who  can  doubt, 
ut  they  in  all  thing.^  did  consent  to  those  that  chose  them  ?  Who  will  not 
easily  believe  that  they  animated  them  and  followed  their  footsteps  ?  Who 
understands  not  that  such  men  must  wish  that  our  Lord  would  have  slept 
continually,  and  never  have  awoke  to  judgement  to  take  cognizance  of  ot 
p'lnish  their  iniquities." — Annal.  Tom.  x,  A.  D.  912,  Art.  8. 


THE    REFORMATION.  155 

Of  the  11th  century  Baronius  writes, — 

"  That  it  was  by  Dithmarus  styled  the  iron  age,  because  iniquity  did  then 
abound,  and  that  many  did  then  discourse  and  beheve,  that  in  this  very  age 
antichrist  was  to  come,  and  the  world  was  to  have  an  end  :  and  the  corrup- 
tion of  manners  which  then  (saith  he)  was  very  great,  especially  among  tht 
ecclesiasticsj  might  easily  persuade  men  that  it  would  be  so." — A.  D.  1001. 

In  the  16th  century,  in  the  council  of  Lateran,  under  Julian 
the  Second,  it  is  declared  that, 

"  Oppression,  rapine,  adultery,  incest,  and  all  pestilent  vices,  did  confound 
all  sacred  and  profane  things,  and  that  the  same  beat  St.  Peter's  ship  so 
impetuously,  that  it  vv^as  almost  drowned." 

"  What  may  we  think,"  said  Platina,  "  will  become  of  our  age,  wherein  our 
snis  are  grown  so  great,  that  they  have  scarce  left  us  any  room  with  God  tc 
obtain  mercy.  How  great  the  covetousness  of  the  priests  is,  and  especially 
of  such  as  rule  among  them  ;  how  great  the  lusts  of  all  sects :  what  ambition; 

f)omp,  pride,  what  ignorance  both  of  themselves,  and  Christian  doctrine,  wha< 
ittle  religion,  and  that  but  hypocritical  rather  than  true,  what  corrupt  manners 
to  be  detested  even  in  lay  people,  I  need  not  say  ;  when  they  sin  so  openly 
and  publicly,  as  if  they  sought  for  commendation  thereby." 

Nicolaus  de  Clemangis,  an  archdeacon  in  the  church  of  Rome 
m  the  15th  century,  in  his  epistle,  where  he  speaks  of  flying  no. 
only  with  our  minds  from  Babylon  but  with  our  bodies  also, 
writes  thus — 

"  Who  can  there  safely  live,  where  not  only  wicked  things  are  lawful,  but 
all  men  are  compelled  by  the  severest  punishments  to  believe,  speak,  and 
follow  the  most  wicked  and  ungodly  things  ;  and  to  embrace  them  as  things 
just  and  laudable ;  where  they  do  not  only  not  receive  sound  doctrine,  bu* 
bitterly  persecute  all  those  who  do  resist  the  madness  of  their  wills  ?  *  * 
What  is  it,  think  you,  to  be  drunk  with  the  cup  of  Babylon,  but  from  long 
conversation  with  her  to  be  so  infected  with  the  contagion  of  her,  that  follow- 
ing the  erring  herd,  you  willingly  embrace  false  things  for  true ;  perverse,  for 
righteous,  mad  things  for  sound :  and  to  desire  rather  to  be  mad  with  the 
jnultitude,  than  to  be  wise  alone  with  danger  and  derision  ?  He  that  is  dif- 
ferent in  manners  from  them,  ought  not  to  live  there,  where  the  plague  of 
corruption  hath  so  prevailed  as  to  infect  all  men  with  its  contagion." — -P.  177. 

In  his  book  of  Simoniacal  Prelates,  he  says,  cap.  1  : — 

"  The  church  is  now  become  a  shop  of  merchandise,  or  rather  of  robbery 
and  rapine  ;  in  which  all  the  sacraments  are  exposed  to  sale.  *  *  And, 
therefore,  you  see  such  men  admitted  to  the  priesthood  and  other  holy  orders, 
who  are  idiots,  unlearned,  and  scarce  able  to  read,  though  way  wardly,  and 
without  understanding  one  syllable  after  another,  who  know  no  more  of  Latin, 
than  they  do  of  Arabic,  who,  when  they  read,  pray,  or  sing,  know  not  whethei 
tiiey  bless  God,  or  blaspheme  itim — men  undiscipUned,  unquiet,  gluttons, 
drunkards,  praters,  vagabonds,  lustful,  bred  up  in  luxury,  and  in  one  word, 
kII^,  and  ignorant." 

I  will  not  shock  your  ears  by  reading  the  passage  which  fol 
lows.  In  his  book  of  The  Corrupt  State  of  the  Church,  cap, 
lii,  he  tells  us, 

"  That  she  was  defiled  with  the  sink  of  all  vices  ;  and  might  be  fitly  called 
the  Church  of  Malignants  :  that  the  saying  of  the  prophet  was  now  verified, 
vhat  from  the  least  q'  them  to  the  greatest  ev^ry  one  was  given  to  covetousnes^ 


156  THE    JUSTIFi\;ATION    OF 

that  from  the  prophet  to  the  pnest  every  one  dealt  falsely.     *     *     *     *     Vi  ^1 
*  preaches  or  declares  the  gospel?     Who,  either  by  word  or  deed,  sho»irS  Jie 
v/ay  to  Ihe  eternal   ?" 

Speaking  of  the  Pope,  he  says — 

*'That  by  taking  from  the  diocesans  and  patrons  the  liberty  of  presentation 
to  their  benefices,  he  had  stoci^ed  the  church  with  ignorant  and  wicked  men. 
[Tow  great  a  number  of  expectants  from  that  time  came  in,  not  from  their 
fitudies  or  the  schools,  but  from  the  plough  and  servile  arts,  to  become  parish 
priests,  and  obtain  other  benefices,  who  knew  little  more  of  the  Latin,  than 
the  Arabic  tongue;  who  could  not  read,  and,  which  is  a  shame  to  speak  of, 
scarce  kneio  Ji  from  B,  and  yet  their  immorality  loas  greater  than  their  igno^ 
ranee;  for,  being  educated  in  idleness,  without  learning,  they  followed  nothing 
but  idleness,  sports,  banquetings,  brawlings  and  vain  talk:  hence  is  it,  that 
in  all  places  we  have  so  many  ignorant,  miserable,  and  wicked  priests." — 
Cap.  13. 

In  the  next  place,  he  taxes  the  cardinals  with  avarice,  unclean- 
ness,  simony,  and  other  vices.     He  says, 

"  That  by  their  means  it  came  to  pass,  that  no  man  learned  in  the  scrip 
tures ;  no  honest,  just,  and  virtuous  persons  were  advanced  to  high  dignities ; 
but  only  ambitious  persons,  flatterers,  buffoons,  and  men  corrupted  with  all 
vices;  so  that  they  were  wholly  unlearned,  or  if  they  knew  something  of  the 
imperial  laws,  or  gainful  sciences,  they  never  thought  of  God's  law,  or  of  the 
spiritual  learning,  in  which  the  people  were  to  be  instructed  to  life  eternal — 
that  if  any  person  happened  to  condemn  their  covetousness  and  injustice,  if  he 
endeavoured  by  wholesome  exhortations,  and  by  preaching  to  gain  souls,  if  he 
meditated  more  on  the  laws  of  God,  than  those  of  men,  presently  every  man's 
teeth  were  whet  against  him,  and  ready  to  bite  him  ;  and  they  proclaimed  him 
a  fool,  and  one  unworthy  of  the  priesthood.  So  that  now,  (saith  he)  the 
Btndy  of  the  scriptures,  and  the  professor  of  divinity  are  become  ridiculous  to 
all  men." 

Of  the  Bishops  :  • 

"  That  in  most  diocesses,  the  rectors  or  the  parish  priests  paid  them  a  cer- 
tain price  for  keeping  *****  'f  *.  That  no  man  was  admitted 
into  the  clergy  or  sacred  orders,  or  any  ecclesiastical  degree,  without  rewards, 
which,  saith  he,  is  intolerable ;  that  being  youths  without  beards,  and  scarce 
got  from  under  the  ferula,  they  obtained  a  bishopric,  knowing  as  little  of  that 
office,  as  of  the  mariner's  vocation  ;  that  by  their  filthy  examples  they  led  their 
flocks  into  bye  ways,  which  tended  to  their  ruin." — Cap.  11,  12,  13. 

Again, 

"What  should  I  speak,  (saith  he)  of  the  learning  of  the  priests,  when  it  is 
visible  that  scarce  any  of  them  can  read?  they  know  not  words,  and  much 
less  things:  he  of  them  that  prayeth,  is  a  barbarian  to  himself  If  any  man 
is  idle  and  abhors  labour,  if  he  loves  luxury,  he  gets  now  a  days  into  the  clergjr, 
and  then  presently  he  joins  himself  to  the  rest  of  the  priests  that  are  volup^ 
tuous,  and  live  according  to  Epicurus,  rather  than  according  to  the  laws  of 
Christ."— Cap.  25. 

"  Such  (saith  he)  is  the  abundance  of  wicked  men  in  all  professions,  that 
there  is  scarcely  one  among  a  thousand,  who  sincerely  doth  what  his  profes- 
sion doth  require ;  if  there  be  any  sincere,  chaste,  sober,  frugal  person,  in  any 
college  or  convent,  who  doth  not  walk  in  the  broad  way,  he  is  made  a  ridicu- 
lous fable  to  the  rest,  and  is  continually  called  an  insolent,  mad,  and  hypo- 
critical fellow  ;  so  that  many  who  would  have  been  good,  had  they  lived  with 
iiood  and  honest  men,  are  drawn  by  wicked  company  into  their  vices,  lest 
ihey  should  suffer  the  fore-mentioned  reproaches  among  their  companions."— 
Cap.  26. 


THE    REFORMATION.  157 

He  then  concludes  with  an  apostrophe  to  the  Roman  church — 

*^  What  tliinkest  thou  of  thine  own  prophecy,  the  revelations  c/f  St.  John? 
dost  thou  not  think  they  do  at  least,  in  part,  belong  to  thee ;  thou  hast  not 
surely  so  wholly  lost  all  shame  as  to  deny  this;  look,  therefore,  into  it,  and 
read  the  damnation  of  the  great  whore  sitting  upon  many  waters^  and  there  con- 
template thy  famous  fads,  and  future  rwi/i." — Declarat.  defect.  Virorum  Eccless, 

James  de  Paradise,  of  Chartres,  who  wrote  a  little  after  the 
Council  of  Basil,  says, 

They  who  have  the  presidency  in  councils  on  the  Pope's  behalf  when  they  set 
thai  matters  in  the  council  make  against  their  masters  and  them,  what  can  be 
expected  from  them  but  that  they  will  loithstand  the  decrees  of  such  councils 
with  might  and  main,  either  hy  dissolving  them,  or  sowing  dissensions  in  them; 
and  so  the  thing  shall  remain  unfinished,  and  we  be  driven  to  return  to  the  old 
wilderness  of  error  and  of  ignorance.  Every  body  knows  this  to  be  most  true, 
unless  it  be  some  one  happily  who  is  not  experienced  in  times  past.  The  tra- 
gedy  which  was  acted  in  our  age  in  the  council  of  Basil  doth  sufficiently  prove 
it,  as  they  knew  well  who  have  laid  down  the  story  before  our  eyes. — De  Sept 
Stat.  Ecclesiae.  1.  ♦ 

Of  the  16th  century,  in  which  the  council  of  Trent  was  held, 
and  more  particularly  of  the  proceedings  there,  the  complaints 
are  still  more  grievous. 

"Amongst  most  of  the  primate?  ofour  religion,  whose  example  the  ignorant 
people  ought  to  follow  and  be  conformed  to,  there  is,"  saith  Picus  Mirandula, 
"either  none,  or  very  little  service  of  God,  no  good  life,  no  shame,  no  modesty. 
Justice  is  declined  into  hatred  or  favour,  piety  is  almost  turned  into  supersti- 
tion, and  by  all  orders  of  men  sin  is  so  openly  committed,  that  very  often  the 
virtue  of  the  honest  man  is  made  his  crime,  and  vice  is  honoured  as  a  virtue 
by  them  who  think  the  unheard  of  petulaijcy  and  long  impunity  of  their  vices 
to  be  as  walls  and  enclosures  to  them." — Orat.  ad  Loen.  X,  et  Concil  Lat. 
habit.  A.  D.  1512,  Oper.  t.  xx,  p,  1826. 

Staephylus,  speaking  of  the  destruction  of  the  city  of  Rome, 
which  happened  A.  D.  1527,  observes — 

"  Whence  is  it  that  this  happened  ?  to  loit,  because  all  flesh  had  corrupted  its 
ways,  we  were  all  citizens  and  inhabitants  not  of  the  holy  city  of  Rome,  but 
of  Babylon,  that  wicked  city;  of  which  that  of  the  prophet  Isaiah  is  fulfilled, 

*  How  IS  the  faithful  city  become  an  harlot.'  Let  no  man  think  this  prophecy 
hath  been  fulfilled  already,  in  the  destruction  of  Babylon  or  of  Jerusalem. 
No !  future  things  were  present  to  the  prophet's  eye,  and  this  the  prophet  hath 
declared  to  us,  saying,  *  the  daughter  of  Zion  shall  be  left  desolate,  as  in  the 
wasting  of  the  enemy.'  St.  John  doth  in  the  Revelations  tell  us,  the  daughter 
of  Zion  is  not  Jerusalem  but  Rome ;  and  his  description  of  her  makes  it  plain. 

*  For  the  woman  which  thou  sawest  (saith  he)  is  that  great  city  which  hath 
do'Tiinion  over  the  kin^s  of  the  earth,'  that  is  spiritual  dominion.  She  sits, 
saith  he  upon  seven  hills,  which  properly  agrees  to  Rome,  which,  upon  this 
account,  is  styled  Septicolhs.  She  is  full,  saith  he,  of  the  names  of  blasphemy 
—she  is  the  mother  of  uncleanness,  fornications,  and  abominations,  which  are 
in  the  earth ;  than  which  words  no  more  parlicxdar  demonstration  of  the  city  can 
be  requisite,  seeing  these  iniquities  do  almost  generally  reign,  yet  here  they 
have  their  seat  and  empire.     Orat.  habit,  ad  auditores  Rotae  Maii  15,  A.  D, 

I  might  adduce  many  other  quotations,  but  I  shall  bring  tut- 
ward  only  two  more.  Johannes  de  Eych,  Episcopus  Eystatensis, 
speaking  of  the  corruption  of  the  times  of  the  Reformation,  says 

11 


158  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

"  The  perverted  manners  by  which  almost  all  the  ecclesiastical  order  iff 
stained,  so  cloud  the  senses  of  all,  that  not  only  they  do  not  perceive  the  w^ord 
of  truth  with  their  ears,  but  even  despising;  amendment  of  life,  they  resist  their 
own  salvation  even  with  arms." — Prima  Epistola,  P.  M.  2. 

Franciscus  de  Victoria,  observes,  that, 

"  The  Church  could  neither  bear  her  disorders  nor  their  remedies." — Ec 
clssia  nee  mala  sua,  ncc  remedia,  ferre  posse. — Prelect  4,  prop.  23. 

In  addition  to  these  testimonies  from  Roman  Catholic  authori- 
ties, I  beg  leave  to  observe,  that  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation 
as  my  friend  is  well  aware,  there  was  an  universal  cry  for  a 

REFORMATION  OF  ABUSES. 

I  am  now  come  to  my  second  point,  namely,  the  unscriptural 
nature  of  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  the  church  of  Rome. 
First,  as  to  Tradition. — 

[Here  Mr.  Maguire  interrupte'd  Mr.  Pope.  I  came  here  to 
defend  three  points  of  my  religious  creed.  I  attack  but  three  of 
your's.     I  will  not  allow  you  to  go  into  others. 

Mr.  Pope  replied,  that  the  question  before  them  was  the  jus- 
tification of  the  Reformation ;  and  in  order  to  justify  it,  it  was 
necessary  for  him  to  enter  briefly  into  the  doctrines  of  the  church 
of  Rome. 

Mr.  Maguire.  You  should  defend  yourself,  and  not  attack 
ine.     I  appeal  to  the  written  regulations. 

Mr.  Pope.  I  stand  on  my  defence,  and  am  to  show  that  the 
reformers  were  justified  in  separating  from  the  church  of  Rome  : 
from  the  state  of  that  church,  both  with  regard  to  morals  ana 
doctrine. 

Mr.  Maguire  appealed  to  the  chair :  and  after  a  consultation, 
Mr.  Lawless  stated  the  opinion  of  the  chair,  namely,  that  Mr. 
Pope  had  a  right  to  state  whatever  reasons  occurred  to  his  judg- 
ment, as  having  called  for  the  Reformation,  and  on  the  other 
hand  that  Mr.  Maguire  had  a  right  to  prove  the  scriptural  cha- 
racter of  the  doctrines  opposed,  in  order  to  show,  that  the 
Reformation  was  not  called  for  on  that  account.] 

Mr.  Pope  resumed. — Gentlemen,  I  shall  take  a  rapid  view 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  church  of  Rome,  in  order  to  prove  that 
the  reformers  were  justified  in  separating  from  her  communion 
on  that  ground. 

TRADITION. 

The  church  of  Rome  says — 

"  All  saving  truth  not  being  contained  in  the  holy  scripture,  but  partly  in 
the  scripture,  and  partly  in  unwritten  traditions;  scripture  and  tradition  are 
to  be  received  and  venerated  with  like  piety  and  reverence,  "pari  pietatis 
aflfectu  ac  reverentia." — Conril  Trident.  Scss.  4,  Decret.  de  can.  Script. 


THE    REFORMATION.  159 

The  Douay  Bible  says — 

"You  shall  not  add  to  the  word  that  I  speak  to  you." — Deut.  iv  ch.  2. 

"  Every  word  of  God  is  fire-tried  ;  add  not  any  thing  to  his  words,  lest  thou 
be  reproved  and  found  a  liar." — Prov.  xxx  ch.  5,  6. 

"  For  I  testify  to  every  one  that  heareth  the  words  of  the  prophecy  of  thia 
book :  If  any  man  shall  add  to  these  things,  God  shall  add  unto  him  the 
plagues  written  in  this  book." — Apoc.  xxii  ch.  18. 

"  The  holy  scriptures  can  instruct  thee  to  salvation  by  the  faith  wliich  is  in 
Christ  Jesus  ;  all  scripture  inspired  of  God,  is  profitable  to  teach,  to  remove, 
to  correct,  to  instruct  in  justice :  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  furnished 
to  every  good  work." — 2  Tim.  iii  ch.  15,  17. 

"  You  have  made  void  the  commandment  of  God  for  your  tradition." — 
Matt.  XV  ch.  6. 

I  find,  therefore,  that  tradition  is  condemned,  and  that  scrip- 
ture is  able  "  to  instruct  unto  salvation,  to  teach,  to  reprove,  to 
correct,  and  to  instruct  in  justice,  that  the  man  of  God  may  be 
perfect,  furnished  to  every  good  work."  I  am  desirous  of  know- 
ing, if  the  scriptures  be  imperfect,  by  what  process  they  can 
make  a  man  perfect  in  every  good  work  ? 

READING    THE    SCRIPTURES. 

The  church  of  Rome  intimate,  that  it  is  not  for  the  people  to 
read  the  sacred  scriptures — Indiscriminata  lectio  sacrae  scrip- 
turse  interdicte  est — and  her  practice  abundantly  confirms  the 
information.  Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  4,  Decret.  de  can.  Scrip  :  Ind. 
lib.  prohib.  Reg.  4. 

The  Douay  Bible  says — 

"Come  near,  ye  Gentiles,  and  hear,  and  hearken  ye  people:  let  the  earth 
hear,  and  all  that  is  therein ;  the  world,  and  every  thing  that  cometh  fortli 
of  it." — Isaiah,  xxxiv,  1. 

And  adds  in  the  16th  verse — 

"  Search  te  diligently  in  the  book  op  the  Lord  and  read." 
"  Search  the  scriptures." — John,  v,  39. 

Our  next  subject  is 

PRIVATE    JUDGMENT. 

Certainly  my  friend  has  thrown  new  light  on  the  extent  to 
which  the  church  of  Rome  permits  the  exercise  of  private  judg- 
ment :  however,  I  cannot  avoid  thinking,  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
church  is  in  substance  this — beheve  implicitly  what  the  church 
tells  you. 

The  Douay  Bible  says, 

"Prove  all  thing^s ;  hold  fast  that  which  is  good." — 1  Thess.  v,  21. 
"  Try  the  spirits,  if  they  be  of  God." — 1  John,  iv,  1. 

IMAGE    WORSHIP. 

"/«  is  lawful  to  express  any  person  of  the  most  holy  Trinity  by  certain  sipis 
none  being  so  rude  as  to  think  that  the  divinity  is  expressed  by  that  image. 
But  let  the  pastors  teach  that  by  them  are  declared  some  properties  or  actions 
which  are  attributed  to  God.     The  imao-es  and  relics  of  Christ  and  the  saints 


160  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

are  to  be  duly  honoured  and  venerated ;  and  in  this  veneration,  those  ar« 
venerated  which  are  represented  by  them." — Trent  Catech.  part  iii,  ch.  2,  p. 
302,  Dub.  1816.    Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  25,  de  Invocat. 

The  Douay  Bible  says — 

"  Thou  shalt  not  make  to  thyself  any  graven  thing,  nor  the  likeness  of  any 
thing  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or  in  the  earth  beneath,  nor  of  those  things  that 
are  in  the  waters  under  the  earth ;  thou  shalt  not  adore  them  nor  serve  them." 
— Exod.  XX,  4,  5  :   See  Deut.  iv,  15,  16.    Acts,  xvii,  29. 

All  I  ask  the  church  of  Rome  to  do  is  this — to  write  the  2nd 
commandment  under  every  image  and  picture,  which  are  objects 
of  worship  ;  and  the  common  sense  of  the  votaries  of  the  church 
of  Rome  will  rise  up  and  declare,  that  such  a  practice  is  directly 
opposed  to  the  Word  of  God. 

MEDIATORS. 

The  church  of  Rome  says, 

"There  are  other  mediators  of  intercession  in  heaven  besmes  Jesus  Chnst; 
such  as  angels  and  saints  and  especially,  the  Virgin  Mary,  who  is  the  mother 
of  mercy  and  advocatress  of  the  faithful ;  and  it  is  good  and  profitable  to  in- 
voke them,  and  to  have  recourse  to  their  prayers  and  help." — Cone.  Tid.  Sesa. 
25,  de  Invocat  &c. 

The  Douay  Bible  says — 

"  Jesus  saith  to  him,  I  am  the  truth  and  the  life ;  no  man  cometh  to  tlie 
Father  but  by  me." — John,  xiv,  6,  see  13th  verse. 

"  There  is  ONE  Mediator  of  God  and  man,  the  man  Christ  Jesus." — 
1  Tim.  ii,  5. 

"  Jesus  is  able  also  to  save  for  ever  them  that  come  to  God  by  him,  always 
living  to  make  intercession  for  us." — Hebrews,  vii,  25. 

We  have  already  had  the  subject  of  purgatory  brought  before 
us  ;  and  I  am  inclined  to  think,  that  some  who  believed  impHcitly 
in  that  doctrine,  are  shaken  in  the  implicit  character  of  their 
faith  in  it. 

GOOD    WORKS. 

A  canon  of  the  church  of  Rome,  quoted  on  a  former  day, 
may  be  thus  condensed — 

"The  good  works  of  justified  persons  are  truly  and  properly  meritorious 
and  duly  worthy  of  eternal  life." — Cone,  Trid.  Sess.  6,  cap.  16,  can.  32. 

The  Douay  Bible  says, 

"By  grace  you  are  saved  through  faith,  and  that  not  of  yourselves,  for  it  is 
the  gift  of  Goa ;  not  of  works,  that  no  man  may  glory." — Eph.  ii  ch.  8. 

"The  wages  of  sin  is  death,  but  the  grace  of  God  life  everlasting  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord." 

Or  more  plainly, 

"The  gift  of  God  is  eternal  life,  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord." — 
Rom.  vi,  23. 

"When  you  have  done  all  things  /hat  are  commanded  you,  say:  we  are 
unprofitable  servants ;  we  have  done  that  which  we  ought  to  do.''— LukCi 
«vii,  10. 


THE    REFORMATION.  161 

I  need  not  now  speak  on  transubstantiation-  -that  will  be  our 
subject  of  discussion  to-morrow,  you  will  then  see  that  that 
doctrine  can  obtain  no  support  from  Holy  Writ. 

I  pray  you  to  judge  from  this  brief  contrast,  between  the 
doctrines  of  the  church  of  Rome  and  those  of  the  Bible,  whether 
the  reformers  were  not  called  upon  to  separate  from  such  a 
com  .n  union. 

But  my  quarrel  with  the  church  of  Rome,  like  that  of  the 
reformers,  is  touching  that  grand  tenet  which  she  has  laboured 
to  set  aside,  justification  by  faith — acceptance  at  the  bar  of  God 
in  dependance  solely  on  the  atoning  blood  of  the  Saviour.  I 
trace  up  the  principal  errors  of  the  church  of  Rome  to  ignorance 
or  rejection  of  this  fundamental  article  of  the  Christian  religion. 
Would  she,  for  instance,  hold  that  good  works  entitle  to  eternal 
life,  if  she  believed  that  "  by  the  deeds  of  the  law  no  flesh  could 
be  justified,"  (Rom.  iii,  20,)  and  that  the  sinner  could  be  saved 
only  by  the  obedience  unto  death  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ? 
How  could  the  church  of  Rome  maintain  the  doctrine  of  supere- 
rogation, if  she  acknowledged  that  "  every  mouth  is  shut  and  the 
whole  world  brought  in  guilty  before  God,"  (Rom.  iii,  19,)  and 
that  "cursed  is  every  one  that  continueth  not  in  all  things  written 
in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do  them?" — (Gal.  iii,  10.)  Did  she 
believe  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  to  be  an  all-sufFicient  atonement, 
would  she  think  a  purgatorial  fire  necessary?  If  she  knew  that 
the  blood  of  Christ  cleanseth  from  all  sin,  would  she  hold  that 
the  soul  stands  in  need  of  an  additional  purgation  ?  Could  she 
for  a  moment  entertain  the  notion  of  repeating  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  if  He  were  acknowledged  by  her  as  having  made  by 
"  one  oblation  of  himself  once  for  all,"  an  end  of  sin,  reconcilia- 
tion for  iniquity,  and  as  having  brought  m  everlasting  righteous- 
ness ?  This  grand  doctrine  the  reformers  proclaimed,  and  for 
the  maintaining  of  it  they  stood  out  from  the  church  of  Rome. 
Luther  deemed  it  the  "  articulus  stantis  vel  cadentis  Ecclesiae." 
and  I  say,  let  this  doctrine  be  preached  in  all  its  fulness,  and  we 
shall  plant  a  lever  beneath  the  fortresses  of  Babylon  ;  and  soon 
shall  we  hear  her  sentence  issuing  from  the  throne  of  the  Eter- 
nal, "  Down  with  her,  down  with  her,  even  to  the  ground." 

Such  are  the  reasons  upon  which  I  vindicate  the  Reformation.. 
It  is  not  my  intention  to  justify  every  act  of  the  reformers.  If 
I  should  wish  to  recriminate,  Mr.  Maguire  may  be  assured,  that 
I  have  it  in  my  power,  in  turn,  to  place  in  the  most  awful  point 
of  view,  the  characters  of  those  who  are  recognized  as  the  heads 
of  the  church  of  Rome.  There  is,  however,  this  wide  distinc- 
tion— I  do  not  acknowledge  Luther  as  the  head  of  my  church  : 
Christ,  the  Lord  over  all,  is  the  head  of  his  mystical  body ;  I 
call  no  man  master  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term,  and  therefore 


168  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

am  not  bound  to  follow  men  only  so  far  as  they  follow  Christ, 
much  less  am  1  called  upon  to  justify  every  net  in  the  history  of 
their  lives.  These  are  the  two  grounds,  on  which  I  would  justify 
the  separation  from  the  church  of  Rome,  which  took  place  in 
the  sixteenth  Century  : — first,  ihe/pfioral  condition  of  the  church  of 
Rome — and  secondly,  the  unscriptural  character  of  her  doctrines. 

Mr.  Maguire. — Before  I  proceed  further,  I  beg  leave  here 
to  enter  my  solemn  protest  against  the  decision  of  the  Chair, 
and  the  line  of  conduct  which  has  been  adopted  towards  me. 
I  publicly  and  solemnly  protest  against  it.  It  is  an  obvious  and 
complete  departure  from  the  understanding  and  principles  upon 
which  this  discussion  was  commenced.  Before  I  came  to  Dub- 
lin, I  had  expressly  agreed  and  stipulated  with  Mr.  Pope,  that 
he  should  select  any  three  articles  of  the  Catholic  doctrine  which 
he  pleased,  for  attack — that  I  should  select  three  points  against 
him,  and  that  we  should  thus  act  the  parts  of  plaintiff  and  de- 
fendant reciprocally.  I  appeal  to  the  candour  of  my  Protestant 
auditors,  if  this  were  not  the  express  stipulation  upon  the  faith 
of  which  I  agreed  to  meet  Mr.  Pope  in  this  public  controversial 
discussion.  One  of  the  points  which  I  selected  against  Mr. 
Pope,  was  a  justification  of  the  Protestant  Reformation.  I 
admit  he  was  free  to  bring  forward  every  circumstance  which  he 
could  consistently  urge  in  defence  of  that  schism.  '  But  is  he, 
on  this  occasion,  instead  of  confining  himself  to  that  single 
point,  to  level  his  attacks  against  all  and  every  one  of  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Catholic  church?  Am  I,  in  the  short  period  allotted 
to  me,  expected  to  be  able  to  defend  all  the  doctrines  of  my 
church,  and  to  repel  all  the  calumnies  and  misrepresentations 
which  Mr.  Pope  may  Hiring  forward  against  her.  I  can  only 
say  that  my  confidence  has  been  abused — that  I  have  been  any 
thing  but  well  treated.  I  shall,  however,  proceed  to  rebut  the 
scandalous  charges  advanced  by  Mr.  Pope,  and  which  he  has 
grounded  upon  the  authority  of  Protestant  historians  exclusively, 
with  the  exception  of  Baronius  and  Bellarmine,  and  upon  the 
testimony  of  historians,  be  it  observed,  deserving  of  little  credit 
upon  this  particular  subject.  I  must  also  remark  that  instead 
of  there  being  only  three  points  on  each  side  for  attack  and 
defence,  mutually,  I  have  only  three  points  at  present,  to  urge 
against  Mr.  Pope,  while  he  has  put  me  on  my  defence  for  fifteen 
or  twenty.  Before  I  proceed  to  defend  the  articles  of  my  creed 
against  the  rigmarole  attack  which  has  been  levelled  at  them  by 
my  opponent,  I  shall  advert  to  one  or  two  facts  which  it  may 
be  as  well  for  you  to  bear  in  memory. 

Mr.  Pope  has  lot  at  all  answered  my  arguments  respecting 
the  proofs  of  the  authenticity,  integrity,  and  inspiration  of  the 


I'HE    REFORMATION.  163 

sacred  scriptures.  With  regard  to  the  Sixtine  edition,  I  deny 
that  but  two  copies  of  it  are  in  existence.  I  have  here  the  Six- 
tine  and  Clementine  editions.  A  Roman  Catholic  clergyman 
of  this  city  purchased  a  copy  of  it  exposed  publicly  to  sale  in 
the  city  of  Rome.  I  will  admit  that  Clement  did  not  wish  that 
that  edition  of  the  Bible  should  be  circulated.  Orders  had  been 
given  by  the  council  of  Trent  that  a  pure  and  perfect  edition  of 
the  Latin  Yulgate,  "  quam  emendatissime,"  should  be  prepared 
by  learned  men  under  the  sanction  of  the  sovereign  pontiff. 
Many  verbal  corruptions  were  to  be  found  in  the  edition  then 
in  common  use,  arising  either  from  the  neglect  of  the  copyists, 
or  from  the  ignorance  of  those  who  endeavoured  to  purify  the 
text.  Now  Sixtus  Quintus  had  previously  taken  upon  him  not 
only  to  make  out  a  pure  copy  of  the  Bible,  but  to  introduce 
changes  from  the  original  Hebrew  and  Greek  editions,  which, 
in  the  opinions  of  St.  Jerome,  St.  Augustin,  and  Dr.  Wall,  a 
Protestant  bishop,  were  not  so  pure  as  the  old  Latin  and  Italian 
translations.  When  Clement  perused  the  edition  of  Sixtus,  he 
ordered  that  it  should  be  purified  according  to  the  ancient  Latin 
and  Italian  translations.  But  I  defy  any  man  to  point  out  a 
substantial  difference  between  the  Clementine  and  Sixtine 
editions.  It  is  curious,  too,  that  in  the  preface  to  the  Sixtine 
edition,  that  preface  from  which  Mr.  Pope  quoted  with  such 
triumph  the  phrase  "  ne  in  mimma  particula,''^  it  is  pronounced 
lawful  to  make  verbal  amendments  and  corrections,  but  upon 
condition  that  they  shall  be  introduced  into  the  text,  and  not  put 
in  the  margin,  ^'•ad  offensionem  populi  vitandam,^^ — lest  the  people 
should  be  scandalized,  not  distinguishing  between  verbal  and 
substantial  alterations.  The  ne  in  minima  particular  it  is  obvious 
relates  to  matters  of  faith. 

Mr.  Pope  asserted  that  masses  were  said  for  the  rich  and  not 
for  the  poor.  I  have  the  Missal  here  on  the  table,  and  by  refer- 
ring to  it,  Mr.  Pope  will  find  that  mass  is  offered  up  for  all  tho 
faithful,  living  and  dead,  without  any  reservation  whatever.  In 
the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  we  pray  for  all  Christians,  for  all  infidels, 
heretics,  schismatics — nay,  for  Mr.  Pope  himself.  The  charge 
of  taking  money  comes  with  a  bad  grace  from  the  other  side. 
There  is  a  Protestant  clergyman  in  this  city,  who  is  called 
chaplain  to  the  Virgin  Mary ;  his  income  amounts  to  jC300  a 
year,  and  if  the  leases  were  out,  it  would  average  jC3,000  per 
annum.  This  was  bequeathed,  some  centuries  ago,  in  order  to 
have  masses  said  for  the  departed  ;  the  masses  are  not  said,  but 
the  Protestant  parson  pockets  the  money. 

The  important  fact  has  been  estabhshed  of  Mr.  Pope's  igno- 
rance of  the  Bible.  Though  he  has  told  us  he  has  made  the 
Bcriptures  his  continual  study,  and  though  he  professed  a  thorough 


/64  THE    JUiTlFICATION    OF 

acquaintance,  both  with  the  Protestant  and  Catholic  versions,  he 
acknowledged  his  ignorance  on  Saturday  of  the  following  text : 
"  And  yet  man  knoweth  not  whether  he  be  worthy  of  love  or  hatred." 
I  can  inform  him  that  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  ninth  chapter  of 
Ecclesiastes.  Between  the  Protestant  and  Catholic  versions  of 
this  text,  there  is  no  substantial  difference  as  it  runs  thus  in  the 
Protestant  Bible — "  No  man  knoweth  either  love  or  hatred,  by 
all  that  is  before  him." — Mr.  Pope  talked  of  the  Cathohc  church 
teaching  that  all  truths  are  not  contained  in  scripture.  I  have 
already  proved,  that  all  truths  are  not  contained  in  the  scriptures ; 
and  I  challenge  Mr.  Pope  to  produce  proofs  from  scripture  foi 
five  articles  of  the  Protestant  creed.  But  I  should  recollect 
that  he  throws  the  Protestant  church  entirely  overboard.  I  beg 
leave  to  ask  him,  does  he  consider  the  existence  of  a  church  at 
all  absolutely  necessary,  under  the  Christian  dispensation  1  He 
holds,  it  appears,  the  opinion  of  justification  by  faith  only.  What 
does  St.  Paul  say? 

"If  I  should  have  all  faith,  so  that  I  could  move  mountains,  and  have  not 
charity  I  am  nothing." — 1  Cor.  xiii,  2. 

There  is  an  example  of  faith  without  charity.    St.  James  says, 
"  What  shall  it  profit,  my  brethren,  if  a  man  say  he  hath  faith,  but  hath  not 
works  ?    Shall  faith  be  able  to  save  him?  ii,  14.     "For  as  the  body  without 
the  spirit  is  dead  ;  so  also  faith  without  works  is  dead." — Ibid.  26. 

If  every  thing  be  contained  in  the  scriptures,  why  has  not  Mr. 
Pope  shown  me  texts  to  prove  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
— baptism,  with  the  sign  of  the  cross,  &c.  Why  was  it  decreed 
by  the  Apostles,  at  the  council  held  in  Jerusalem,  that  it  appeared 
good  to  them  to  abstain  from  all  blood  1  I  believe  Mr.  Pope 
has  no  objection  to  take  some  good  gravy  occasionally.  In 
doing  so,  he  goes  in  opposition  to  a  positive  command  of  the 
Apostles.  I  have  produced  a  commandment  of  our  Saviour  for 
washing  the  feet,  which  taken  juxta  tenorem  verborum,  is  as  posi- 
tive a  commandment  as  any  to  be  found  in  scripture.  Mr.  Pope 
has  endeavoured  to  show,  that  this  was  applicable  to  hot  coun- 
tries, as  if  the  commandments  of  the  Lord  were  to  be  adopted 
according  to  the  different  temperatures  of  different  countries, 
and  not  applied  to  all  indiscriminately.  Is  it  not  obvious  to 
common  sense,  that  Christ  intended  his  commandments  should 
be  observed  in  cold  as  well  as  in  hot  countries  ?  I  called  on 
ray  opponent  to  produce  proofs  from  scripture,  authorizing  the 
baptism  of  infants.  But  I  should  recollect  that  he  throws  bap- 
tism overboard.  He  adheres  to  justification  by  faith  only.  I 
wou- a  agree  fully  in  the  dogma  with  him  if  the  word  "  only" 
were  removed.  For  what,  I  would  ask,  did  God  give  free-will 
to  man?  And  why  did  our  blessed  Redeemer  enjoin  the  keep- 
ing of  the  commardments  as  a  condition  for  salvation? 


THE    REFORMATION.  165 

"But  if  thou  vill  enter  into  life,  keep  the  commandments." — Matt, 
chap,  xiv,  17. 

I  now  come  to  Mr.  Pope's  rule  of  faith.  He  will  say,  as  he 
has  said,  that  it  is  contained  in  the  holy  scriptures  alo.ie.  I  beg 
to  ask  my  opponent,  if  the  scriptures  alone  be  his  rule  of  faith, 
is  it  not  necessary  for  us  to  examine  all  the  inspired  books  which 
have  been  written  ]  Does  he  believe  it  necessary  to  know  the 
whole  Bible,  or  a  portion  of  it,  for  salvation?  If  it  be  only 
necessary  to  know  a  portion  of  the  Bible,  I  call  upon  him  to 
produce  his  authority  from  scripture  for  that  belief. 

Mr.  Pope. — It  may  be  well  to  read  and  know  the  whole 
scriptures,  if  a  person  have  the  opportunity  ;  but  I  believe  that  a 
man  can  be  saved  without  reading  the  whole  Bible. 

Mr.  Maguire. — Show  me  a  text  to  justify  that  belief? 

Mr.  Pope. — When  the  Apostle  was  asked,  what  shall  I  do  to 
be  saved  l  he  answered — "  Believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  thou  shalt  be  saved."  Acts,  xvi,  31.  At  one  period,  only 
the  Old  Testament  was  written. 

Mr.  Maguire. — When  it  only  was  written,  no  person  was 
called  upon  to  found  his  sole  rule  of  faith  upon  it. 

Mr.  Pope. — I  conceive  if  a  person  have  the  opportunity,  it  is 
right  to  know  all  the  scriptures.  But  a  person  can  be  saved 
without  knowing  the  whole  volume. 

Mr.  Maguire. — So,  if  a  person  read  the  Old  Testament 
merely,  and  is  not  acquainted  with  the  New  Testament,  he  may 
be  saved  l 

Mr.  Pope. — I  will  make  no  such  concession. 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  would  much  rather  you  would  give  us  texts 
of  scripture,  and  not  mere  assertion.  I  never  heard  of  so  loose 
a  doctrine.  I  shall  now  reduce  Mr.  Pope  to  a  dilemma. — If 
the  scriptures  alone  be  his  rule  of  faith,  I  ask  is  it  not  necessary, 
in  that  case,  to  examine  all  the  canonical  books  that  have  been 
written  %  Now,  all  the  canonical  books  that  have  been  written, 
are  not  to  be  found  in  any  part  of  the  known  world.  God  would 
have  preserved  all  the  inspired  writings,  had  he  intended  that 
the  scriptures  alone  should  be  the  rule  of  our  faith  ;  but  God  has 
not  preserved  all  the  inspired  books  of  scripture,  for  not  less 
than  twenty  have  perished ;  therefore  God  did  not  intend  them 
as  the  07ilij  rule  of  faith — Mr.  Pope  must  admit,  according  to  his 
principles,  that  it  is  necessary  to  examine  all  the  canonical 
books — for  if  not,  how  could  he  ascertain  his  rule  of  faith  ?  there 


166  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

might  happen  to  be  in  these  books,  which  are  lost,  or  which  he 
should  pass  over,  texts  opposed  to  his  doctrine,  and  which  per- 
haps expressly  taught  that  the  rule  of  faith  was  not  in  the  scrip- 
tures alone.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Pope  shall  contend  that 
it  is  only  necessary  to  know  a  partion  of  the  Bible,  I  call  upon 
him  to  prove  that  to  me  by  a  positive  text  of  scripture. 

Now,  again,  either  all  the  inspired  books  that  have  been 
written  are  necessary  to  form  the  rule  of  our  faith,  or  only  a  part 
is  necessary.  If  Mr.  Pope  shall  assert  that  all  are  necessary, 
then  the  scriptures  are  no  rule  of  faith,  since  all  the  scriptures 
are  not  to  be  found.  But  if  Mr.  Pope  say,  that  only  apart  is 
necessary,  let  him  produce  a  text  of  scripture  to  prove  that  as 
we  cannot  take  his  bare  xoord  on  matters  of  such  importance ;  but 
I  defy  Mr.  Popo  to  produce  any  such  text,  therefore  the  scripture 
cannot  be  the  sole  rule  of  faith.  A  living  authority  must  be  left 
to  direct  and  decide  on  matters  of  controversy. 

I  shall  now  show  you  that  we  have  not  all  the  scriptures.     In 
the  book  of  Numbers,  chap,  xxi,  14,  we  read  thus  : 
"  It  is  said  in  the  book  of  the  wars  of  the  Lord." 

Where  is  that  book  1     Gone. 

In  the  third  book  of  Kings,  (which  Protestants  call  the  first) 
Chron.  iv,  32,  we  read  that 

"Solomon  spoke  three  thousand  proverbs,"  and  "his  canticles  were  a 
thousand  and  five." 

Where  are  these  ?  What  a  small  portion  of  them  we  have  now. 
In  the  second  book  of  Chronicles,  ix,  29,  it  is  said — 

"Now  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Solomon,  first  and  last,  are  they  not  written  in 
the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  and  in  the  prophecy  of  Ahijah,  and  in  the 
vision  of  Iddo." 

Where  are  all  those  books  1 

The  first  book  of  Chronicles  concludes  with  these  words, 

"  Name  the  acts  of  David  the  king,  first  and  last,  behold  be  they  not  written 
in  the  book  of  Samuel  the  seer,  and  in  the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  and 
in  the  book  of  Gad  the  seer?" 

All  those  prophecies  are  lost. 

In  St.  Paul's  epistle  to  the  Colossians  he  commands  them  lo 
read  in  the  church  the  epistle  to  the  Laodiceans — Where  is  that 
epistle  1     Lost. 

In  St.  YauVs  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  v,  9,  he  says, 
"  I  wrote  to  you  an  epistle." 

Where  is  the  epistle  which  St.  Paul  wrote  to  them  before  the 
epistle  which  is  now  called  ^rs^ .?  It  is  not  in  existence.  So 
here  we  find  two  epistles  of  St.  Paul  lost. 

St.  Matthew  (and  here  I  may  remark  that  the  original  Hebrew 
gospel  of  St.  Matthew  is  quite  lost.    I  should  hke  to  know  undei 


THE    REFORMATION.  16? 

such  circumstances,  how  a  Protestant  can  found  his  faith 
upon  the  gospel  of  St,  JMattheiv,  which  is  lost,  unless  he  depena 
upon  the  authority  of  an  infallible  translator) — St.  Matthew,  I  say, 
xxvii,  9,  cites  words  as  spoken  by  the  prophet  Jeremy,  which 
are  not  to  be  found  in  any  part  of  Jeremy  now  extant.  Where- 
fore, part  of  Jeremy  the  prophet  is  lost,  as  Cotrzein  in  this  place 
proves  out  of  2  Chron.  xxxv,  20.  St.  Matthew  also,  ii,  23,  says, 
"  It  was  spoken  by  the  prophets  he  shall  be  called  a  Nazarene." 
The  books  of  the  prophets  who  spoke  thus  have  also  perished, 
for  we  find  Christ  never  called  a  Nazarene  in  all  the  prophets' 
books  at  present  extant  St.  Chrysostom  on  this  place,  (Homil. 
ix,  in  Matt,  i,)  says, 

"  Many  of  the  prophetical  monuments  have  perished  ;  for  the  Jews  being 
careless,  and  not  only  careless,  but  also  impious,  they  have  carelessly  lost 
some  of  these  monuments ;  others,  they  have  partly  burnt,  partly  torn  in 
pieces." 

Here  we  find  twenty  books  of  scripture  lost.  Will  Mr.  Pope 
show  that  none  of  those  lost  books  are  necessary,  when  he  ac- 
knowleges  no  church,  and  asserts  that  the  Bible  is  his  sole  rule 
of  faith]  Mr.  Pope  talks  much  about  his  rule  of  faith,  and  yet 
he  cannot  tell  where  it  is  to  be  found.  If  he  say  that  the  scrip- 
tures are  not  to  be  had — that  a  portion  of  scripture  is  only 
necessary  for  salvation,  let  him  produce  to  me  a  positive  text 
of  scripture  to  that  effect — for  I  allow  nothing  but  n  positive  text 
of  scripture  to  decide  upon  such  a  vitally  important  point.  I 
challenge  him  to  show  where  his  sole  rule  of  faith  is  to  be  found. 
But  he  cannot  produce  any  text  to  prove  that  all  the  scriptures 
are  not  necessary,  or  that  a  portion  of  them  is  sufficient,  for 
salvation.  Mr.  Pope  has  had  recourse  to  the  Fathers  to  prove 
the  authenticity  of  scripture,  though  he  rejected  their  authority 
when  quoted  by  me  in  support  of  the  doctrine  of  purgatory. 

I  have  shown  from  seventeen  holy  Fathers  down  to  the  sixth 
century,  that  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  was  retained  and  professed 
throughout  the  Catholic  church.  He  has  quoted  St.  Jerome  in 
proof  of  the  authority  and  authenticity  of  the  sacred  scriptures. — 
But  when  I  quote  Jerome  and  the  other  Fathers  in  support  of 
the  doctrine  of  purgatory,  they  are  very  consistently  rejected  by 
Mr.  Pope.  He  talked  of  Hebrew.  I  venture  to  say  he  is  un- 
acquainted with  the  Hebrew  points.  He  spoke  of  the  original 
Hebrew  copies.  Would  it  not  be  necessary  for  the  ignorant 
Protestant,  according  to  the  principles  of  Mr.  Pope  to  compare 
all  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin  copies  of  the  scriptures,  before 
he  could  be  satisfied  of  their  inspiration  ?  All  the  proofs  which 
Mr.  Pope  has  advanced,  of  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures, rest  upon  human  authority,  and  no  act  of  faith  can  be 
built  upon  such  a  fowndat/oi.     Mr.  Pope  certainly  spoke  of  an 


168  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

internal  evidence.  Now,  if  that  be  admitted,  it  must  be  admitted 
as  a  first  principle.  It  is  denied,  and  ridiculed  by  the  learned 
Chillingworth,  a  Protestant  divine,  who,  in  reply  to  the  words 
of  his  adversary,  "  That  the  divinity  of  a  wTiting  cannot  be 
known  by  itself  alone,  but  by  some  extrinsic  authority,"  says, 
This  you  need  not  prove^for  no  wise  man  denies  it,^^ 

If  it  were  a  first  principle  and  self-evident,  as  Mr.  Pope  would 
liave  it,  who  would  deny  it?  The  truth  of  first  principles  no 
rational  man  ever  doubted.  But  millions  of  Christians  deny 
the  doctrine  of  internal  evidence.  The  Arians,  the  Manichaeans, 
the  Marcionists,  &c,  all  denied  internal  evidence.  The  Catholics 
throughout  the  whole  world  for  eighteen  hundred  years,  could 
not  discover  this  inward  lights  but,  on  the  contrary,  have  loudly 
protested  against  the  doctrine  of  internal  illumination,  since  that 
new  system  has  been  broached.  It  cannot,  therefore,  be  a  first 
principle,  which  Chillingworth  himself  and  millions  of  Christians 
unequivocally  denied.  //  is  only  a  foolish  and  visionanj  scheme, 
to  which  those  who  have  no  better  resort,  to  prove  the  inspiration  of 
the  sacred  scriptures, 

Mr.  Pope. — Gentlemen — I  need  scarcely  observe,  that  my 
friend  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  table  has  been  speaking  on  the 
subject  which  belonged  to  the  second  day  of  the  meeting.  Mr. 
Maguire  has  protested  against  the  line  of  our  present  proceeding. 
He  has  spoken  much  of  obedience  to  authority ;  and^  suVely, 
when  the  chairmen  decided,  he  was  bound,  according  to  his  own 
principles,  to  bow  to  their  decision.  I  submit  to  every  man  of 
common  sense,  whether  the  line  of  argument,  adopted  by  me  on 
this  occasion,  was  not  perfectly  justifiable — namely,  to  show 
that  the  peculiar  doctrines,  held  by  the  church  of  Rome,  wero 
anti-scriptural,  and  that  the  Reformers  were,  in  consequence, 
called  upon  to  separate  from  her  communion.  How  could  this 
charge  have  been  substantiated  without  the  consideration  of  the 
doctrines  themselves  1  My  friend  should  remember,  that  not 
satisfied  with  the  abstract  question  of  private  judgment  for  the 
second  day,  he  selected  two  or  three  other  topics  of  debate—- 
the  right  of  private  judgment,  to  pronounce  upon  the  canonicity, 
integrity,  authenticity,  and  interpretation  of  the  holy  scriptures. 
The  second  day  was  the  time  set  apart  for  the  consideration  of 
those  subjects.  My  friend  seemed  to  state,  that  he  held  in  his 
hand  the  Sixtine  edition  of  the  Yulgate,  but  I  say,  that  the  edition 
which  he  produced,  is  the  Clementine. 

[Here  Mr.  Maguire  called  upon  Mr.  O'Reilly,  into  whose 
hands  he  said  that  he  had  given  the  Sixtine  copy  for  the  purpose 
of  bringing  it  to  the  meeting.] 


THE    REFORMATION,  169 

Mr.  Pope. — I  beg  to  remark,  that  so  great  is  the  scarcity  of 
the  Sixtine  Bible,  that  the  Jesuit  Fisher  not  merely  denied  that 
?iny  were  in  existence,  but  stated,  that  Sixtus  V,  bad  not  pub- 
lished any  edition  of  the  Yulgate  whatever !  Masses,  we  are 
told,  are  generally  offered  for  rich  and  poor :  but,  if  they  be 
offered  in  this  general  way,  why,  I  would  ask,  why  should  the 
Priests  take  money  specially  from  the  rich  ?  My  friend  brought 
forward  a  passage,  "Faith  without  charity  is  dead."  The 
Apostles,  I  admit,  speak  of  such  a  faith  ;  but  it  was  merely  such 
as  enabled  an  individual  to  work  miracles,  and  yet  left  him  unin- 
fluenced by  the  grace  of  God.  The  genuine  faith  of  God's 
people  "purifies  the  heart,"  (Acts  xv,  9,)  works  by  love,  (Gal. 
V,  6,)  and  overcomes  the  world  (1  John  v,  4,)  enabling  the 
Christian  to  act  in  consistency  with  his  profession,  and  is  there- 
fore the  grand  germ  of  spiritual  life,  and  the  parent  of  Christian 
morality.  Although  the  difference  may  appear  trivial  between 
being  justified  by  faith,  and  by  faith  alone,  in  truth  the  distinction 
is  most  important.  If  the  scriptures,  I  am  asked,  be  the  only 
rule  of  faith,  are  we  not  then  obliged  to  be  acquainted  with  all 
the  scriptures,  lest  one  part  should  contradict  another.  I  meet 
the  question,  and  say,  God  never  contradicts  himself;  he  never 
varies,  but  is  the  same  yesterday,  to-day  and  for  ever :  that 
which  God  speaks  once,  as  to  moral  truth,  is  eternal  and  immu- 
table. My  friend  has  observed,  that  if  all  the  scriptures  need 
not  be  examined,  then  all  are  not  necessary,  I  answer,  that  it 
is  the  duty  of  all  men,  if  they  have  opportunity,  to  read  all  the 
scriptures.  Yet,  provided  they  place  their  hopes  on  Christ, 
(and  in  order  to  do  so,  they  need  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit)  they  will  be  accepted  through  him  at  the  bar  of  God, 
though  they  may  not  have  read  every  part  of  the  sacred  volume. 
My  friend  has  spoken  about  sundry  books  that  have  been  lost, 
which,  he  says,  formed  part  of  the  inspired  records,  and  has 
directed  our  attention  to  passages  of  the  Bible,  which  allude  to 
other  writings.  But  the  onus  rests  on  him,  before  his  argument 
can  carry  any  weight,  to  prove  that  the  books  of  which  he  speaks, 
ever  belonged  to  the  sacred  canon — that  they  were  the  dictates 
of  inspiration,  and  not  portions  of  mere  ordinanj  hisiory,  which 
recorded  some  particulars  that  might  not  have  been  mentioned 
in  the  canonical  writings.  I  would  also  beg  to  observe,  that 
my  friend  believes  in  tradition  and  infaUibility.  Roman  Catholic 
Divines,  assuming  that  the  Jewish  church  waS  infaUible,  are  in 
the  habit  of  arguing  from  analogy,  that  the  chur<ih-t)f  Rome  is 
gifted  with  unerring  authority.  Taking  Mr.  Maguire  on  this 
ground,  I  would  ask,  what  was  the  use  of  infallibility  to  the 
Jewish  church,  if  it  could  not  succeed  in  \>reserving  the  canon 
of  the  Old  Testament,  perfect  and  entire       Further — the  onus 

15 


i70  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

rests  on  him  to  show,  that  cither  the  written  tradition,  or  the 
viva  voce  exposition  of  the  church  of  Rome,  has  supphed  the 
portion  which,  Mr.  Maguire  say^,  has  been  lotst,  or  perfectly 
accords  with  it.  Now  I  take  the  sacred  scriptures  which  we 
possess,  and  with  them  I  contrast  the  traditions  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  church,  and  finding  that  they  are  in  opposition  to  the 
oracles  of  truth,  I  conclude  that  they  are  not  of  God  ;  for  God 
cannot  contradict  himself.  My  friend  did  not  hke  that  I  should 
refer  to  the  Fathers  on  the  canonicity  and  authenticity  of  the 
scripfures.  I  admit  their  authority  as  credible  testimony — but 
not  as  infallible.  We  must  be  convinced,  that  when  the  scrip- 
tures are  quoted  by  very  ancient  writers,  they  must  at  least  have 
been  coeval  with  the  authors  who  cite  passages  from  them.  I 
appeal  to  the  Fathers,  to  prove  by  their  historical  evidence  the 
authenticity  of  the  scriptures.  This  kind  of  evidence  in  support 
of  the  scriptures,  is  much  more  powerful  than  that  in  favour  of 
any  other  ancient  record.  It  matters  not  very  much  for  my 
argument,  as  to  the  antiquity  of  the  sacred  volume,  whether  the 
character  of  the  Fathers  who  quote  from  it,  be  good  or  evil. 
Mr.  Maguire  has  allowed  the  authority  of  the  Fathers,  as  faith- 
ful witnesses. 

My  friend  on  the  opposite  side  has  scouted  the  idea  of  in- 
ternal evidence.  If  God  has  said,  that  his  invisible  attributes 
are  to  be  discerned  by  his  works. 

"  For  the  invisible  things  of  him  from  the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly 
Been,  being  understood  by  the  things  that  are  made,  his  eternal  power  also 
and  divinity." — Rom.  i,  20. 

And  if  it  be  true  that  "  God  has  magnified  his  word  above  all 
his  name,"  (Ps.  cxxxviii,  2,)  may  we  not  expect  that  the  Deity 
has  stamped,  in  an  especial  manner,  upon  this  page  of  Revela- 
tion, the  impress  of  his  own  divine  character  i  Mr.  Maguire 
has  observed,  that,  according  to  my  showing,  God  has  not 
/)rovided  for  the  spiritual  wants  of  all  mankind.  I  return  the 
argument — is  not  the  poor  man,  according  to  his  principles,  in 
a  worse  condition  than  he  would  be,  according  to  mine  ?  Is 
the  poor  man  to  have  recourse  to  councils  and  Fathers  ?  Again 
I  stand  on  firmer  ground.  Mr.  Maguire,  in  order  to  prove  the 
truth  of  the  Bible,  must,  according  to  his  principles,  first  prove 
the  authority  of  the  church,  and  refer  the  poor  man  to  innumer- 
able folios.  I  have  only  to  preach  the  Gospel,  and  to  put  the 
sacred  scriptures  into  the  hands  of  those  whom  I  address,  at  the 
same  time  adding,  if  necessary,  some  arguments  in  support  of 
their  internal  evidence.  One  reason  which  may  convince  every 
unprejudiced  mind  that  God  intended  his  word  to  rest  for  support 
principally  upon  internal  evidence,  is  the  fact,  that  few  would  be 
able  to  examine  the  general  proofs  in  support  of  the  ir spired 


THE    REFORMATION.    .  171 

▼olur.ie.  God  has  chosen  many  of  the  poor  of  this  world  to  be 
bright  gems  in  the  Saviour's  diadem  ;  and  when  we  know  that 
the  great  bulk  of  mankind  are  doomed  to  labour,  the  fact  fur- 
nishes us  with  a  presumptive  argument  in  favour  of  the  proofs, 
which  rest  on  internal  evidence,  as  being  open  to  every  indi- 
vidual who  seriously  examines  the  sacred  oracles.  My  friend 
has  said,  that  I  was  afraid  of  the  Fathers  in  reference  to  purga- 
tory— permit  me  to  say,  that  was  I  not  afraid  to  meet  him  on  the 
grounds  of  the  Fathers  ;  T  had  various  other  quotations  from 
their  writings  ;  And  here  allow  me  to  observe,  that  my  opponent 
quoted  a  passage  from  Cyprian's  letter  to  Antonian — "  It  is  one  * 
thing  to  be  waiting  for  pardon,  another  to  attain  glory,"  &c,  &c. 
It  has  nothing  to  do  with  purgatory.  The  church  had  relaxed 
some  penitential  censures  against  those  who  had  fallen  in  per- 
secution ;  and  St.  Cyprian  was  defending  this  measure,  and 
proving  that  the  state  of  the  martyrs  entering  at  once  into  glory 
was  so  much  superior  to  the  miseries  of  the  lapsed,  who  were 
anxiously  expecting  re-admission  into  the  church,  and  must  feel 
anxiety  about  a  future  state,  that  there  was  no  danger  to  be 
anticipated  from  the  relaxation — this  he  shows  by  adding  "it  is 
one  thing  to  expect  with  anxiety  the  judgment  of  the  Lord  in  the 
day  of  judgment — another  to  be  crowned  by  the  Lord."  Ri- 
galtius,  a  Roman  Cathohc  commentator,  gives  this  explant*tion. 
Further,  in  reference  to  the  Fathers.'  Most  of  the  quotations 
adduced  by  Mr.  Maguire  do  not,  I  imagine,  support  the  doctrine 
of  purgatory :  they  refer  to  oblations  for  the  dead ;  but  those 
oblations  for  the  dead  were  not  offered  for  souls  in  purgatory. 
In  the  primitive  church  a  practice  existed  of  making  thanks- 
givings and  offerings  for  those  who  had  departed  in  the  faith. 
As  Mr.  Maguire  has  quoted  a  passage  from  Sir  Edwin  Sandys, 
he  can  have  no  objection  to  my  reading  an  extract  or  two  from 
the  same  author.  Sir  Edwin  gives  us  the  following  general 
view  of  the  church  of  Rome,  p.  35  : — 

"  This  being  the  main  ground  work  of  their  policy ;  and  the  general  means 
to  build  and  establish  it  in  the  minds  of  all  men ;  the  particular  ways  they  hold 
to  ravish  all  aflfections,  and  to  fit  each  humor  (which,  their  jurisdiction  and 
power  being  but  persuasive  and  voluntary,  they  principally  regard),  are  well 
nigh  infinite ;  there  being  not  any  thing  either  sacred  or  profane,  no  virtue 
nor  vice  almost,  no  things  of  how  contrary  condition  soever;  which  they 
make  not  in  some  sort  to  serve  that  turn ;  that  each  fancy  may  be  satisfiedf, 
and  each  appetite  find  what  to  feed  on.  Whatsover  either  wealth  can  sway 
with  the  lovers,  or  voluntary  poverty  with  the  despisers,  of  the  world ;  what 
honour  with  the  ambitious ;  what  obedience  with  the  humble ;  what  great 
employment  with  stirring  and  mettled  spirits;  what  perpetual  quiet  with 
heavy  and  restive  bodies;  what  content  the  pleasant  nature  can  take  in 
pastimes  and  jollity ;  what  contrariwise  the  austere  mind  in  discipline  and 
rigour;  what  love  either  chastity  can  raise  in  the  pure,  or  voluptuousness  in 
the  dissolute ;  what  allurements  are  in  knowledge  to  draw  the  contemplative, 
or  in  actions  of  state  to  possess  the  practic  dispositions,  what  with  the 


172  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

hopefii?  orcrogative  of  reward  can  work ;  what  errors,  doubts,  and  dangers 
with  t})/  fearful ;  what  change  of  vows  with  the  rash,  of  estate  with  the  incon- 
stant; >/hat  pardons  with  the  fauity,  or  supphes  with  the  defective;  what 
miracles,  with  the  credulous ;  what  visions  with  the  fantastical ;  what  gor- 
geouf:n€3s  of  shows  with  the  vulgar  and  simple ;  what  multitude  of  ceremonies 
with  the  superstitous  and  ignorant ;  what  prayer  with  the  devout,  what  with 
the  chajitable  v/orks  of  piety;  what  rules  of  higher  perfection  with  elevated 
affections ;  what  dispensing  of  breach  of  all  rules  with  men  of  lawless  condi- 
tons;  in  sum,  what  thing  soever  can  prevail  with  any  man  either  for  himself 
t>  pur?ue,  or  at  least- wise  to  love,  reverence,  or  honour  m  another  (for  even 
therein  also  man's  nature  receiveth  great  satisfaction),  the  same  is  found  with 
them,  not  as  in  other  places  of  the  world,  by  casuality  blended  without  order, 
and  of  necessity,  but  sorted  in  great  part  into  several  professions,  counte- 
nanced with  reputation,  honoured  with  prerogatives,  facilitated  with  provisions, 
and  yearly  maintenance,  and  either  (as  the  better  things)  advanced  with 
expectation  of  reward,  or  borne  with,  how  bad  soever,  with  sweet  and  silent 
permission.  What  pomp,  what  riot,  to  that  of  their  cardinals  ?  what  severity 
of  life  comparable  to  their  hermits  and  capuchins?  who  wealthier  than  their 
prelateu?  who  poorer  by  vow  and  profession  than  their  mendicants?  On 
the  one  side  of  the  street  a  cloister  of  virgins,  on  the  other  a  sty  of  courtczana 
with  public  toleration  ;  this  day  all  in  masks,  with  all  looseness  and  foolery: 
to-morrow  all  in  processions,  whipping  themselves  till  the  blood  follow ;  on 
one  door  an  exconnnunication,  throwing  to  hell  all  transgressors :  on  another 
a  jubilee,  or  full  discharge  from  all  transgressions.  Who  learneder  in  all 
kind  of  sciences  than  their  Jesuits?  What  thing  more  ignorant  than  their 
ordinary  mass-priests?  What  prince  so  able  to  prefer  his  servants  and 
followers  as  the  Pope,  and  in  so  great  multitude?  Who  able  to  take  deeper 
or  readier  revenge  on  his  enemies?  What  pride  equal  unto  his,  making 
kings  kiss  his  pantofle?  what  humility  greater  than  his,  shriving  himself 
daily  on  his  knees  to  an  ordinary  priest?  Who  difficulter  in  despatch  of 
causes  to  the  greatest?  who  easier  in  giving  audience  to  the  meanest?  Where 
greater  rigour  in  the  world  in  acting  the  observation  of  the  church  laws? 
where  less  care  or  conscience  of  the  commandments  of  God?  To  taste  llesh 
on  a  Friday,  where  suspicion  might  fasten,  were  a  matter  for  the  inquisition  ; 
whereas,  on  the  other  side,  the  Sunday  is  one  of  their  greatest  market-days. 
To  conclude:  never  state,  never  government  in  the  Morld  so  strangely  com- 
])acted  of  infinite  contrarieties^  all  tending  to  entertain  the  several  humours 
of  all  men,  and  to  work  what  kind  of  effects  soever  they  shall  desire;  where 
rigour  and  remissness,  cruelty  and  lenity,  are  so  combined,  that,  with  neglect 
of  the  church,  to  stir  aught  is  a  sin  unpardonable ;  whereas  with  duty  towards 
the  church,  and  by  intercession  for  her  allowance,  with  respective  attendance 
of  her  pleasure,  no  law  almost  of  God  or  nature  so  sacred,  which,  one  way 
or  other,  they  find  not  means  to  dispense  with,  or  at  least-wise  permit  th^ 
breach  of,  by  connivance  and  without  disturbance." — Page  34,  et  seq. 

"Europae  Speculum,  or,  a  View  or  Survey  of  the  state  of  P^-eligion  in  tht* 
western  parts  of  the  world:  wherein  the  Roman  Religion,  and  pregnant 
policies  of  the  church  of  Rome  to  support  the  same,  are  notably  displayed  ; 
with  some  other  memorable  discoveries  and  commemorations." — Lond.  1632. 

Sir  Edwin  Sandys  gives  the  following  description  of  the  state 
of  religion  in  Italy  in  his  time  : — 

''The  whole  country  is  strangely  overflown  and  overborne  with  wickedness, 
with  fiithiness  of  speech,  with  beastliness  of  actions;  both  governors  and 
subjects — both  priests  and  friars,  each  striving  as  it  were  with  other  in  an 
impudentness  therein  ;  even  so  far  forth,  that  what  elsewhere  would  not  be 
tolerated,  is  there  in  high  honour — what  in  some  other  places  even  a  loose 
person  would  be  ashamed  to  confess,  their  priests  and  friars  refrain  not  openly 
to  practise."— P.  19. 


THE    REFORMATION.  173 

Again,  p.  160.  "It  doth  grieve  me  to  speak,  yea,  the  thought  of  it  mu8* 
needs  bring  horror  and  detestation  ;  what  a  multitude  of  Atheists  do  brave  it 
in  all  places — there  most,  where  the  papacy  is  most  in  his  prime — what 
renouncers  of  God,  blasphemers  of  his  Son,  villanizers  of  his  saints,  and 
scorners  of  his  service :  who  think  it  a  glorious  grace  to  adore  the  king  of  a 
country;  but  to  name  or  think  reverently  of  the  Creator  of  the  world,  to 
proceed  from  a  timerous  base-mindedness  and  abjectness." 

Sir  Edwin  Sandys  also  describes  the  state  of  religion  in  Spain 
in  his  time.  Though  Mr.  Maguire  objected  to  the  authority  of 
Mr.  White,  he  cannot  refuse  to  admit  that  of  Sir  Edwin  Sandys. 

"  The  next  is  Spain,  reputed  loholly  the  Pope's  also,  as  having  been  a  long 
time  governed  by  the  most  devoted  king,  and  longer  curbed  in  by  the  most 
cruel  inquisition  that  ever  the  world  had  for  the  upholding  of  that  sway."  *  * 

"For  a  kingdom  that  hath  the  sirname  of  Catb'^'''^  "  n  greater  danger 
in  the  world,  either  wholly  or  in  great  part  to  k^cloi  on  Christianity,  unless 
grace  from  above  and  better  wisdom  to  stay  the  increase  of  those  pestilent 
cankers  of  Mahomedanism  and  Judaism,  which  threaten  the  final  decay,  and 
eating  out  of  Christianism." — Pp.  163,  164. 

"  There  is  in  Spain  a  sort  of  people  of  the  Marrany,  as  they  term  them, 
who  are  baptized  Jews  and  Moors,  and  many  of  them  in  secret  withal 
circumcised  Christians. 

"  All  which,  although  conforming  themselves  in  some  sort  of  outward  show 
unto  the  Christian  religion,  yet  are  thought  in  heart  to  be  utterly  averse  from 
it,  and  to  retain  an  inward  desire  to  return  to  that  superstition,  from  which 
their  ancestors  by  rigour  and  terror  were  driven ;  and  the  Jews  will  say  in 
Italy  that  there  come  divers  Spaniards  to  them  to  be  circumcised  there,  and 
so  away  to  Constantinople  to  plant  in  the  east." — Pp.  164,  165. 

I  shall  not  occupy  your  time  with  other  quotations.  You  will 
doubtless  ask,  how  could  such  passages  occur  in  a  work  which 
apparently  advocated  the  church  of  Rome.  Si?^  Edivin  Sandys 
gave  the  statement  ivhick  JMr.  Maguire  read  from  his  ivorks  merely 
as  the  allegations  of  Roman  Catholic  ecclesiastics  in  support  of 
their  system,^  You  shall  see  whether  this  charge  is  not  founded 
upon  fact.  In  page  24,  Sir  Edwin  Sandys  begins  a  sketch  of 
the  arguments  which  Roman  Catholics  employ  in  advocating 
the  church  of  Rome  ;  and  aftejr  having  given  the  sketch,  he 
adds  in  page  33  : 

"  This  is  the  main  course  of  their  persuading  at  this  day,  whereby  they 
seek  to  establish  that  former  foundation :  in  the  unfolding  whereof  1  have 
been  the  longer,  because  trial  hath  taught  me,  that  not  by  some  men's  private 
election,  but,  as  it  should  seem,  by  common  order,  direction,  or  consent,  they 
have  reUnquished  all  other  courses,  and  hold  them  to  thisj  as  the  most  effec- 
tual means,  in  the  way  of  persuasion,  to  insinuate  their  desire,  and  to  work 
their  design." 

Here  is  "  iniquitas  quotationis." — Hear  it  gentlemen  !  After 
this  expose,  I  ask,  is  Mr.  Maguire  justified  in  boasting,  as  he 
has  done,  of  his  quotations  having  been  taken  from  the  originals  ? 

*  A  debate  on  the  above  quotation  having-  arisen,  viz.  whether  Mr.  Maguire  quoted 
it,  as  put  hy^othetically,  as  it  is  in  the  work  from  which  he  took  it,  namely,  Fletcher'.s 
Comparative  View,  or  not ;  some  gentlemen  affirmmg  that  he  did,  and  some  that  ha 
did  not— it  was  agreed  that  the  tex*  s'lould  stand,  and  that  this  note  should  be  added 

15* 


174  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

I  have  brought  him  to  one  original,  and  you  have  now  seeri^ 
how  ill  his  quotation  bears  the  test  of  such  an  examination ! 

I  come  more  immediately  to  the  question,  and  I  call  distinctly 
upon  Mr.  Maguire  to  do  so.  He  is,  perhaps,  reserving  some 
(seemingly  plausible  arguments  for  the  last  half  hour,  when  he 
knows  that  no  opportunity  will  be  afforded  me  of  replying.  I  call 
on  him  to  relinquish  this  ruse  de  guerre.  He  may  be  satisfied 
with  the  mancBuvre,  in  which  he  succeeded  the  first  day,  when, 
by  speaking  at  one  time  but  a  quarter  of  an  hour,  he  deprived  me 
of  the  advantage  of  closing  the  business  of  the  day ;  while  he 
had  an  opportunity  of  addressmg  the  meeting  in  speeches  ex- 
ceeding by  one  those  which  I  delivered.  I  now  call  on  him  to 
come  like  a  man  ,o  ..-c  question  :  let  him  not  raise  a  dust,  and 
then  hide  the  subject  behind  the  cloud  which  he  has  created. 

I  have  shown  that  the  reformers  were  justified  in  their  separ- 
ation from  the  church  of  Rome,  by  the  debased  moral  condition 
of  that  church  as  well  as  by  the  unscriptural  nature  of  her  doc- 
trines. Mr.  Maguire  has  asserted,  that  my  quotations,  as  to  the 
immoial  character  of  the  church  of  Rome,  were  from  Protestant 
writers.  1  beg  leave  to  state,  that  the  authors  whose  testimonies 
I  brought  forward,  were  Roman  Catholics,  Let  Mr.  Maguire 
show  that  his  church  was  not  in  error :  let  him  show  that  her 
doctrines  were  scriptural :  and  then  I  shall  admit  that  the  refor- 
mers were  not  justified  in  separating  from  her  communion.  Mr. 
Maguire  will  talk  much  of  the  evils  of  concession,  of  private 
judgment,  and  fanaticism,  which,  he  will  maintain,  were  exhib- 
ited at  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  We  shall  hear,  doubtless, 
of  the  character  of  Henry  YHI,  of  Luther,  and  of  others  ;  but 
I  now  say  to  Mr.  Maguire,  come  to  the  pouit^  and  do  not  evade 
the  question.  You  stand  before  an  enlightened  assembly  :  the 
PEOPLE  of  Ireland  are  becoming  daily  wiser;  they  will  see, 
believe  me,  on  whose  side  sophistry  exists,  and  will  distinguish 
empty  unfounded  assertions  from  solid  proofs;  nor  will  they  suffer 
boasts  to  pass  for  argument.  Let  Mr.  Maguire  then  meet  me  on 
the  point  at  issue.     I  stand  ready  to  vindicate  the  Reformation. 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  never  before  saw  the  superiority  of  close 
argument  so  triumphantly  displayed — has  Mr.  Pope  ever  glanced 
at  the  questions  which  I  put  to  him  so  repeatedly  and  so 
pointedly  1  I  inquired  from  him  the  scriptural  foundation  upon 
which  a  Protestant  can  build  an  act  of  faith :  /  expected — ijou 
expected^  no  doubt,  a  distinct  answer  to  the  question — has  he 
dared  to  give  it  /  Protestants  and  Catholics,  I  beseech  you  to 
look  to  that.  Let  i\\efact  he  recorded  and  go  forth  to  the  world. 
He  has  quoted  from  Fra  Paolo,  who  was  no  Catholic,  and  whom 
Uiflhop  Burnett  calls  a  Calvinistic  heretic.     The  Jansenists  have 


THE    REFORMATION.  175 

been  condemned  by  the  Catholic  church,  and  it  is  not  fair  to 
quote  them  against  me.  The  only  CathoUcs  to  whom  he  re- 
ferred, were  Baronius  and  Bishop  Fisher. 

Protestants  and  CathoUcs,  I  again  beseech  you  to  remark, 
that  my  opponent  has  not  attempted  to  answer  the  arguments 
which  I  addressed  to  him  relative  to  the  scriptures  :  he  has 
indeed  made  an  eloquent  harangue  upon  the  necessity  of  the 
Reformation — I  shall  satisfy  you  on  that  subject  before  I  have 
done.  It  is  foolish  to  endeavour  to  escape  from  my  direct  ar- 
guments by  such  an  artifice.  I  may  remark  to  Mr.  Pope,  that 
in  quoting  historians,  he  should  resort  to  those  of  approved 
character,  and  well  established  veracity.  I  repeat  my  challenge 
to  Mr.  Pope  to  answer  the  arguments  which  I  brought  forward 
relative  to  the  scriptures.  I  spoke  of  the  scriptures  which  have 
been  lost :  Mr.  Pope  attempted  to  throw  discredit  on  them, — 
he  said  they  were  mere  histories,  and  not  inspired.  I  ask, 
would  they  have  been  referred  to  as  holy  books,  in  the  genuine 
and  inspired  writings  and  recommended  there,  if  they  were  not 
equallij  inspired  1  If  they  be  mere  histories,  as  Mr.  Pope  would 
have  you  believe,  then  the  inspired  writers  must  have  been  guilty 
of  fraud  in  referring  to  them.  Mr.  Pope  includes  in  his  sweeping 
denunciation,  the  two  epistles  cf  St.  Paul,  which  I  proved  to 
have  been  lost.  Will  Mr.  Pope  say,  that  they  too  were  mere 
histories  ? — Will  he  dare  to  dispute  their  inspiration  ? — Mr. 
Pope,  one  would  think,  wishes  to  convert  religion  and  scripture 
into  mere  history.  I  shall  indulge  in  no  rhetoiical  manoeuvres  ; 
nor  will  I  amaze  you  with  high  sounding  language,  instead  of 
defensive  arguments — I  shall  adhere  to  close  disputation.  1 
appeal  to  the  judgments  of  the  candid  and  the  impartial.  Have 
I  not  shown  the  fallacy  of  the  few  arguments  advanced  by  my 
Reverend  opponent]  Mr.  Pope  has  put  a  curious  interpre- 
tation on  the  remarkable  words  of  St.  Paul ;  "  If  I  have  all 
faith,  so  that  I  could  remove  mountains,  and  have  not  charity, 
I  am  nothing."  Mr.  Pope,  says  that  this  is  merely  a  faith  that 
can  work  miracles.  Surely,  if  the  faith  which  could  move 
mountains,  and  work  miracles,  could  not  save  a  man  unless  he 
had  charity  ;  a  fortiori,  the  faith  which  could  not  perform  mira- 
cles, would  not  save  a  man  without  charity.  He  says,  that  God 
could  not  contradict  himself;  and  he  gave  us  an  eloquent  de- 
scription of  the  wonderful  attributes  of  the  Deity — I  never  gave 
utterance  to  the  absurd  and  blasphemous  opinion,  that  God 
could  contradict  himself.  Mr.  Pope,  I  repeat,  is  only  raising 
castles  in  the  air  for  the  mere  purpose  of  throwing  them  down 
again.  He  has  returned  to  his  doctrine  of  internal  evidence — • 
he  says,  that  God  Almighty  knev/  that  the  great  mass  of  man- 
kind would  not  be  able  to  answer  the  sophistries  of  the  Deists 


176  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

and  Infidels ;  that  owing  to  their  ignorttnce,  their  habits,  and 
their  want  of  opportunities,  they  would  be  unable  of  themselves 
to  remove  the  objections,  which  the  ingenuity  of  the  unbeliever 
would  throw  in  their  way.  This  is  the  most  powerful  argument 
that  could  be  urged,  to  prove  that  God  did  not  intend  this  holy 
book  to  form  the  sole  rule  of  m.an's  faith :  God  always,  in  his 
infinite  wisdom,  adapts  the  means  to  the  end — If  Mr.  Pope's 
doctrine  were  true,  would  the  Almighty  have  adapted  the  means 
to  the  end?  Mr.  Pope's  doctrine  directly  militates  against  the 
attributes  of  the  Deity. — I  again  call  upon  him  to  tell  me  what 
particular  portion  of  scripture  is  sufficient  for  salvation^  and  to 
found  his  opinion,  not  upon  reasonings,  but  upon  a  positive  and 
direct  text  of  scripture. 

Gentlemen,  in  proceeding  to  discuss  the  Reformation,  I  shall, 
at  the  outset,  lay  down  two  principles  upon  which  I  found  my 
arguments.  My  first  principle  is  this — that  God  never,  in  any 
instance,  employed  notorious  characters,  savage  and  ferocious 
men,  immoral,  and  self-degraded  wretches,  to  reform  religion. 
My  second  proposition  is,  that  the  reformers  of  the  sixteenth 
century  were  men  of  that  description.  If  I  prove  both  these 
propositions,  and  neither,  I  imagine,  can  be  leasonably  disputed, 
I  shall  bring  this  argument  to  a  speedy  conclusion.  Be  pleased 
to  observe,  that  in  all  history  we  read  of  no  reformers  of  reli- 
gion but  Moses  and  the  prophets,  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Apos- 
tles, who  were  the  agents  and  instruments  under  Christ.  Moses 
may,  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  be  called  the  reformer  of  the 
Patriachal  religion.  Keligion  had  been,  preserved  to  his  days 
by  the  tradition  of  the  patriarchs.  If  we  revert  to  the  patriarchs, 
we  will  find  God  preserving  religion,  not  through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  bad  and  proverbially  corrupt  men,  but  of  such  charac- 
ters as  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  &c.  For  the  space  of  two 
thousand  years,  religion  was  preserved  by  the  patriarchs,  before 
a  line  of  scripture  was  written.  P.eligion  was  then  wafled  down 
by  Iheir  tradiiiofi,  pure,  simple,  and  uncorrupted.  But  the  time 
arrived  when  the  old  religion  was  to  be  built  upon  a  more  per- 
manent basis,  to  be  reformed,  and  enlarged.  Moses  was  selected 
by  God  for  that  purpose,  to  combine  the  traditions  of  the  patri- 
archs into  one  settled  law.  Moses  proved  his  extraordinary 
mission  by  the  performance  of  manifest  and  splendid  miracles. 
The  prophets  too  proved  their  divine  mission  by  unquestioned 
miracles.  VV^hen  our  Saviour  came  to  perfect  the  Jewish  reli- 
gion, do  we  not  read  of  the  splendid  miracles  performed  by  him 
in  attestation  of  his  character  as  a  reformer?  Did  not  the 
Redeemer  declare,  that  if  he  had  not  performed  such  miracles, 
the  Jews  who  disbelieved,  would  have  had  no  sin  in  theml  Did 
he  not  emphatically  sav,  that  if  he  had  not  performed  such  mira- 


THE    REFORMATION.  177 

cles,  they  would  have  been  justified  in  putting  him  to  death  ?  T 
never  said,  that  God  granted  infallibility  to  the  Jewish  synagogue, 
but  I  affirm,  that  it  never,  de  facto,  erred  till  the  prophecies  were 
accomplished,  and  the  Redeemer  came,  who  then  established  his 
church,  to  which  he  promised  infallibility  in  express  terms.  If, 
then,  the  Jewish  church,  to  which  infallibility  was  not  promised, 
did  not  err  till  the  coming  of  Christ,  a  fortiori,  the  church  which 
Christ  established,  and  to  which  he  expressly  promised  infalli- 
bility will  never  err.     Hear  the  words  of  Christ  himself : 

*•  The  church  is  the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth."—"  The  gates  of  hell  shall 
never  prevail  against  it." — "  He  that  will  not  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  unto 
Ihee  as  the  heathen  and  the  publican." — "I  will  send  you  the  spirit  of  truth 
to  teach  you  all  truth." — "  I  will  send  you  another  Paraclete,  to  abide  with 
Tou  FOR  EVER." — "  Yc  are  the  light  of  the  world." — "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the 
earth." — '*  A  city  built  upon  a  mountain  cannot  be  concealed." 

It  is  Mr.  Pope  who  would  make  the  God  of  Heaven  contra- 
dict himself.  As  the  poor  and  ignorant  man  could  never  of 
himself  ascertain  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures,  nor  discover 
therein  Mr.  Pope's  rule  of  faith — God  appointed  the  living 
authority  of  the  church  to  guide  and  direct  him,  and  which  church 
I  have  already  proved  to  be  infallible. 

Mr.  Pope  has  recurred  to  the  mass,  and  quoted  the  apostate 
Blanco  White — a  notable  authority  truly,  to  oppose  the  authority 
and  credit  of  the  Catholic  church.  He  might  as  well  quote  the 
authority  of  Julian  the  apostate,  against  the  Catholic  church. 
We  are  desired  by  St.  Paul  to  avoid  a  heretic,  as  one  condemned 
by  his  private  judgment — propria  judicio  condemnatvs — and  St. 
John  forbids  to  even  salute  him,  Mr.  Pope  says,  that  I  make 
him  a  heretic — I  deny  that,  in  the  sense  in  which  I  used  the  word 
heretic,  Mr.  Pope  is  one.  He  was  born  of  Protestant  parents — 
I  say  with  St.  Augustin,  that  he  is  a  heretic  who  goes  out  of  the 
church  of  himself  and  chooses  a  religion  of  his  own. 

Dr.  Johnson,  who  was  a  Protestant,  and  whose  orthodoxy 
cannot  be  questioned — whose  piety  and  devotion  were  well  known 
offered  up  prayers  for  his  mother. 

In  the  course  of  his  observations,  Mr.  Pope  has  alluded  to  the 
longer  time  which  was  granted  me  to  speak  on  the  first  day.  It 
arose  from  the  circumstance  of  my  having  sat  down  on  my  pre- 
vious half  hours  too  soon,  and  consequently,  I  was  allowed  a 
few  minutes  at  the  close  of  the  discussion  to  make  up  for  that 
deficiency.  I  had  prop  3sed  then  that  the  discussion  should  be 
carried  on  by  interrogatory,  and  it  strikes  me  that  that  would 
be  the  better  way  of  conducting  it.  By  the  interrogative  mode, 
you  perceive,  that  I  have  already  succeeded  in  making  my 
opponent  give  contradictory  answers  to  two  questions  relative  to 
the  circulation  of  the  sacreJ  scriptures  ;  while  he  supposed  he 


78  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

nad  confined  me  in  an  imaginary  circle,  I  put  a  question  to  him 
which  he  has  not  attempted  to  answer.  He  could  not  tell  what 
portion  of  scripture  was  necessary,  to  instruct  unto  salvation,  or 
what  portion  unnecessary. 

It  is  rather  strange,  that  Mr.  Pope,  who  professes  such  vene- 
ration for  the  Son  of  God,  should  make  nothing  of  the  promises 
of  our  Saviour  to  his  church,  and  endeavour  to  explain  them 
away  by  sophistry  and  absurd  metaphysical  distinctions.  Let 
that  fact  be  marked — who  then  is  the  advocate  of  the  Bible  ?  I, 
who  hold  that  the  sacred  word  of  the  Redeemer,  bears  the  stamp 
of  eternal  truth,  or  he  who  attempts  to  explain  away  that  eternal 
word  by  allegories  and  metaphors  ?  This  is  the  man,  forsooth, 
who  pretends  to  believe  nothing  but  what  is  contained  in  the 
scriptures  !  I  insist  that  God  has  revealed  truths  which  are  not 
in  the  sacred  scriptures.  I  maintain  that  the  word  of  God  is 
infallible,  and  I  maintain  that  the  promises  made  by  Christ  to  his 
church  that  she  shall  never  err — promises  so  plain,  so  explicit, 
and  so  obvious — promises  which  are  dwelt  upon  and  repeated 
by  the  holy  Fathers,  are  eternally  true  and  can  never  fail. 
"  Heaven  and  earth  will  pass  away,  hut  my  words  will  never  pass 
aivay.^^  I  have  already  read  to  this  meeting,  various  passages 
from  the  Fathers  in  support  of  the  doctrines  of  infallibility,  pur- 
gatory, and  the  invocation  of  saints. 

With  regard  to  the  reformers,  I  have  laid  down  a  clear  princi- 
ple— that  God  will  never  employ  openly  abandoned,  proverbi- 
ally vicious,  self  convicted,  immortal  men,  as  the  reformers  of  a 
pre-existing  church,  or  of  any  rehgion.  I  have  already  proved 
from  the  sacred  volume,  that  the  extraordinary  ministers  of  his 
sacred  word  shall  have  the  broad  seal  of  his  mission,  to  wit, 
miracles,  affixed  upon  them.  If  it  be  proved  that  the  ordinary 
ministers  of  religion  may  be  vicious  and  corrupt,  it  does  not 
follow  that  the  extraordinary  ministers  of  religion,  who  came 
forward  as  reformers,  should  bear  that  character.  Christ  did 
not  preach  his  mission  without  exhibiting  to  the  world  the  great 
seal  of  divinity. 

The  mission  to  which  Luther,  and  Calvin,  and  Cranmer  pre- 
tended, was  not  an  ordinary  one.  If  their  mission  were  an 
ordinary  one,  they  should  have  remained  in  that  church  which 
existed  before  them.  They  should  have  shown  an  extiaordinary 
mission  before  they  departed  from  that  church,  which  consisted 
of  all  the  Christian  churches  in  communion  with  the  see  of  Rome, 
where  her  visible  head  resided,  showing  forth  the  commission 
granted  by  Christ  to  his  church.  Luther's  commission  (if  any) 
as  a  reformer  of  the  Catholic  church,  must  have  been  an  extra- 
ordinary one.  Did  he  prove  it  by  miracles  ?  It  is  said  indeed 
that  Calvin,  in  order  to  prove  his  mission  by  a  miracle,  to  remove 


THE    REFORMATION.  179 

the  objections  against  him  on  that  head,  induced  a  man  for  a  large 
•sum  of  money  to  feign  death,  in  order  that  he  (Calvin)  might 
get  the  credit  of  raising  him  from  the  dead.  The  man,  however, 
literally  rose  no  more,  and  Calvin  took  good  care  never  to  repeat 
the  exf)eriment. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  give  you  the  character  of  the  Catholic 
church,  from  writers,  whose  authority  I  suppose  my  learned 
adversary  will  not  be  inclined  to  dispute.  Every  line  which  I 
shall  quote  shall  be  from  Protestant  historians.  Observe,  I  am 
not  about  to  quote  from  masked  Papists  against  the  Protestant 
church,  as  my  opponent  has  quoted  from  masked  Protestants 
against  the  Catholic  church. 

Dr.  Spry  says, 

"  From  the  facts  which  are  recorded  in  scripture,  and  which  other  historical 
testimony  confirms,  we  infer  that  the  Apostles,  in  the  exercise  of  the  power 
vested  in  them,  instituted  that  ecclesiastical  polity  which  was  maintained  in 
the  church  imtil  the  period  of  the  Roformation." 

Davis  says, 

"  It  is  acknowledged  on  all  hands,  that  the  church  of  Rome,  in  its  original 
Btate,  was  Apostolical  and  pure.  And  even  at  the  present  day,  it  has  per- 
severed in  all  the  fundamental  articles  of  the  true  and  Christian  faith.  And 
the  sacraments  ordained  by  the  Gospel  are  here  administered  by  a  priesthood 
which  derives  its  appointment,  by  an  uninterrupted  succession,  from  the  Apos- 
tles, and  its  authority  from  our  Great  Master,^* 

No  wonder,  indeed,  that  these  learned  Protestant  Divines 
should  so  frankly  and  openly  avow,  that  our  doctrine  and  our 
priesthood  are  derived  from  the  Apostles,  and  our  authority  to 
preach  and  teach,  from  our  Great  Master  himself.  For  as  they 
received  whatever  is  valid  of  their  ordination  from  us,  such  con- 
fession is  absolutely  necessary  to  prop  up  their  own  quaking 
system,  and  to  give  even  a  specious  colour  to  their  claims. 

Dr.  Daubeny  thus  writes  : 

"  The  commission  originally  delivered  by  Christ  to  his  Apostles,  has  been 
\)anded  down  in  regular  succession.  Under  the  authority  of  this  commission^ 
the  religion  of  Christ  was  introduced  into  this  country,  at  a  very  early  period  : 
and  the  appointment  of  ministers  under  the  sanction  of  the  Divine  Author- 
ity, has  been  uniformly  received  and  preserved  in  the  church,  wherever  it  has 
existed,  for  1500  years." 

In  the  British  Critic,  we  read, 

**  The  church  government  maintained  by  the  church  of  Rome,  has  been 
\raced  without  a  single  break  in  the  chain^  up  to  the  immediate  successors  of  tht 
Apostles  :  and  the  chain  of  the  episcopacy  was  unbroken  for  1500  yearsy 

Dr.  Tomline,  in  his  Elements,  says  : 

**  When  the  Reformation  took  place  in  England,  the  Bishops  and  clergy 
were  not  consecrated  and  ordained  again.  They  had  received  consecration 
and  ordination  from  men  to  whom  the  power  of  consecrating  and  ordaining 
had  been  transmitted  from  the  Apostles  :    and  that  power  was  not  vitiated.'* 


180  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

Daubeny  thus  defines  Schism  : 

"  Wherever  there  is  a  wilful  separation  from  the  communion  o^  the  cnurcb 
of  Clirist,  there,  according  to  the  original  idea  upon  this  subject,  a  division  04 
Christ's  mystical  body  takes  place  ;  and  there  the  sin  of  schism  is  to  be  found. 
Schism  ITien  consists  in  a  disunion  of  the  members  of  the  church,  occasioned 
by  the  want  of  obedience  to  the  government  which  Christ  by  his  Apostles 
i?iittled  in  it ;  and  a  consequent  separation  from  its  communion,  in  contradic- 
tion to  the  divine  plan  of  its  establishment." 

Mr.  Pope — Gentlemen,  I  beg  to  observe  that  my  quotations 
nave  been  from  Roman  Catholic  authors.  Though  I  have 
referred  to  Father  Paul  during  the  discussion,  yet  on  this  day  I 
have  not  quoted  from  his  writings.  I  again  ask,  whether  greater 
difiiculties  do  not  lie  on  the  side  of  Mr.  Maguire  than  on  mine, 
in  providing  for  the  spiritual  wants  of  the  poor.  We  are  not  to 
dictate  to  the  Almighty  :  we  are  not  to  reason  from  the  line  Oi 
procedure  which  in  our  conceplions  the  Deity  ought  to  adopt :  we 
are  not  to  bring  his  dispensations  to  the  bar  of  our  erring  judg- 
ments :  we  are  to  draw  our  conclusions  from  what  God  has 
done^not  from  what  we  may  imagine.  He  ougM  to  have  done, 
I  have  not  this  day  quoted  the  authority  of  Mr.  White,  although 
I  believe  him  to  be  a  most  respectable  and  conscientious  man. 
My  friend  says  that  I  am  not  a  heretic.  I  may  thank  him  as  an 
individual  for  the  admission ;  but  I  beg  to  know  by  what  authority 
he  makes  the  assertion  1  According  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  I  need  scarcely  remark,  that  all  who  are  with- 
out her  pale  are  heretics,  infidels,  or  excommunicated  persons. 
It  is  well  known,  that  exclusive  salvation  is  her  doctrine,  except 
in  cases  of  invincible  ignorance ;  and  invincible  ignorance,  I  thank 
God,  can  rarely  be  the  lot  of  any  Protestant  in  these  countries. 
With  respect  to  Sir  Edwin  Sandys,  I  am  perfectly  satisfied  that 
a  Roman  Catholic  and  a  Protestant  clergyman  should  examine 
the  original  work,  and  decide  the  question  at  issue  between  us. 
[Mr.  Maguire  agreed  to  this  proposal.]  My  friend  has  told  us 
that  God  never  employed  bad  men  to  accomplish  the  Reforma- 
tion of  his  church.  Our  question  is  not,  whether  the  instru- 
ments were  good  or  evil,  but  whether  the  separation  from  the 
church  of  Rome,  which  took  place  in  the  sixteenth  century,  was 
justifiable.  Mr.  Maguire  has  referred  to  one  or  two  authorities, 
to  show  that  there  existed  some  immoral  men  among  the  reform- 
ers, and  particularly  instanced  Luther.  In  noticing  these  charges, 
permit  me  to  remind  you  that  I  am  descending  from  the  real 
pomt  at  issue.  I  again  assert,  that  the  question  before  us  has 
not  been  met  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Maguire.  I  would  impresa 
this  fact  upon  the  minds  of  the  population  at  large.  My  friend 
has  quoted  from  Protestant  authorities  in  favour  of  the  church 
of  Rome  :  but  I  would  ask,  did  those  quotations  meet  the  charges 


THE    REFORMATION.  181 

brought  against  her  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  One 
of  those  quotations,  referring  to  her  doctrines,  says,  that  she 
retains  all  fundamental  truths.  Were  1  to  grant  this  assertion 
yet  our  charge  is  that  she  has  added  novelties  to  those  funda- 
mental truths,  and  by  that  addition  nullified  them.  With  respect 
to  the  character  of  Luther,  I  beg  to  read  you  a  quotation  from 
Maimbourg,  a  Roman  Catholic  historian,  quoted  in  Fry's  Church 
History,  p.  284. 

**  He  lived  a  moral  life,  and  was  not  given,  in  the  smallest 
degree,  to  covetousness  or  any  other  vice." 

My  friend  asserts  that  Moses,  and  the  prophets,  and  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  were  moral  men,  and  proved  the  divinity  of  their 
mission  by  miracles.  Need  I  say,  that  I  admit  the  truth  of  the 
observation  1  I  shall  meet  it  :  you,  gentlemen,  shall  judge 
whether  I  do  so  successfully.  Moses  came  to  give  perfection 
to  the  preceding  dispensation  :  so  did  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
The  reformers  did  not  usher  in  a  new  dispensation,  neither  did 
they  add  any  thing  to  that  which  was  at  the  time  in  existence  : 
they  only  returned  to  first  principles :  they  dash  to  the  grouna 
the  unscriptural  superstructure  which  had  been  raised  by  the 
church  of  Rome,  and  brought  to  light  the  fundamental  truths  of  the 
Christian  system,  in  their  native  symmetry,  beauty,  and  strength. 
As  they  did  not  introduce  a  new  dispensation,  it  was  not,  there- 
fore, necessary  that  they  should  perform  miracles.  I  find,  that 
under  the  Jewish  dispensation,  the  Israelites  were  cautioned 
against  those,  who  even  predicted  events  which  actually  came 
to  pass,  but  who  endeavoured  to  lead  the  people  into  error  : 

"  If  there  arise  in  the  midst  of  thee  a  prophet,  or  one  that  saith  he  hath 
dreamed  a  dream,  and  he  foretell  a  sign  and  wonder,  and  that  come  to  pass 
which  he  spoke  ;  and  he  say  to  thee,  let  us  go  and  follow  strange  gods,  which 
thou  knowest  not,  and  let  us  serve  them ;  thou  shalt  not  hear  the  words  of 
that  prophet  or  dreamer,  for  the  Lord  your  God  trieth  you,  that  it  may  appear 
whether  you  love  him  with  all  your  heart  and  with  all  your  soul,  or  no ;  follow 
the  Lord  your  God,  and  fear  him,  and  keep  his  commandments,  and  his  voice : 
him  you  shall  serve,  unto  him  you  shall  cleave  :  and  that  prophet  or  forger  of 
dreams  shall  be  slain,  because  he  spoke  to  draw  you  away  from  the  Lord 
your  God,  who  brought  you  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  and  redeemed  you  out 
of  the  house  of  bondage,  to  make  thee  go  out  of  the  way  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  commanded  thee :  and  thou  shalt  take  away  the  evil  out  of  the  midst  of 
thee." — Deut.  xiii,  1,  &c. 

Our  Lord  nimself,  though  he  performed  miracles,  did  not 
merely  refer  to  them,  in  proof  of  his  mission,  but  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, to  Moses,  the  Law,  and  the  Prophets.  I  would  ask, 
did  not  the  performance  of  miracles  terminate,  after  the  Chris- 
tian dispensation  had  been  established  upon  earth  1 — Christ  him- 
self cautioned  his  followers  against  deceivers,  in  the  following 
language : 

16 


182  THE    JUSTIFICATIOIS     OF 

"  If  any  man  shall  say  to  you,  Lo,  here  is  Christ,  or  there,  do  not  believ* 
him ;  for  there  shall  arise  false  Christs  and  false  Prophets,  and  shall  show 
great  signs  and  wonders,  intsoniuch  as  to  deceive,  if  possible,  even  the  elect: 
beholdj  I  have  told  it  to  you  bejorchand.''^ — Alatt.  xxiv,  24. 

Again,  we  are  informed,  that  the  working  of  signs  and  lying 
wonders,  is  a  characteristic  of  the  Man  of  Sin. 

"  Whose  coming,"  the  Apostle  says, "  is  according  to  the  working  of  Satan, 
ki  all  power,  and  signs,  and  lying  wonders,  and  in  all  seduction  of  iniquity 
tc  them  that  perish,  because  they  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth,  that  they 
might  be  saved :  therefore  God  shall  send  the  operation  of  error  to  believe  lying, 
that  all  may  be  judged  who  have  not  beheved  the  truth,  but  have  consented  to 
iniquity."— 2  Thess.  ii,  9—11. 

Again,  the  working  of  miracles  is  mentioned  as  a  character- 
istic of  one  of  the  beasts  : 

"  And  I  saw  another  beast  coming  up  out  of  the  earth,  and  he  had  two 
horns  like  a  lamb,  and  he  spoke  as  a  dragon,  and  he  executed  all  the  power 
of  the  former  beast  in  his  sight,  and  he  caused  the  earth  and  them  that  dwell 
therein,  to  adore  the  first  beast,  whose  wound  to  death  was  healed  ;  and  he 
did  great  signs,  so  that  he  made  also  fire  come  down  from  heaven  unto  the 
Garth  in  the  sight  of  men,  and  he  seduced  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth  for  the 
signs  vv'hich  were  given  him  to  do  in  the  sight  of  the  beast,  saying  to  them 
ihat  dwell  on  the  earth,  that  they  should  make  the  image  of  the  beast,  which 
had  the  wound  by  the  sword,  and  lived  :  and  it  was  given  him  to  give  life  to 
the  image  of  the  beast,  and  that  the  image  of  the  beast  should  speak,  and 
should  cause,  that  whosoever  would  not  adore  the  image  of  the  beast,  should 
be  slain  :  and  he  shall  make  all,  both  little  and  great,  rich  and  poor,  freemen 
and  bondmen,  have  a  character  in  their  right  hand  or  on  their  foreheads  :  and 
that  no  man  might  buy  or  sell  but  he  that  hath  the  character  or  the  name  of 
the  beast,  or  the  number  of  his  name." — Apocalypse,  xiii,  12 — 17. 

You  can  now  determine  whether,  if  even  the  reformers  had 
been  able  to  perform  miracles,  that  power,  per  se,  alone,  would 
have  entitled  them  to  act  as  divinely  commissioned. 

Mr.  Maguire  asks,  by  what  means  religion  was  handed  down 
to  the  time  of  Moses  ?  He  should  rem.ember,  that  the  head  of 
each  family  of  God's  people  was  both  patriarch  and  priest  of  his 
own  house  ;  that  the  great  age  of  those  who  lived  before  the 
flood,  enabled  them  personally  to  communicate  to  their  posterity 
divine  truth  ;  and,  that  their  religion  consisted  of  a  few  simple 
principles.  My  opponent  says,  that  the  Jewish  synagogue  never 
erred.  I  beg  to  remind  him,  that  the  Jewish  church  was  of  divine 
origin,  but  that  the  synagogue  was  of  human  institution.  I  repeat 
it — the  synagogue  was  of  human  institution.  If  we  refer  to 
scripture,  we  find  that  the  leaders  and  priests  of  the  Israehtes 
erred.     In  Exodus,  xxxii,  5,  we  read — 

"  They  said,  these  are  thy  Gods,  O  Israel,  Ihat  have  brought  thee  out  of 
Ihe  land  of  Egypt.  And  when  Aaron  saw  this,  he  built  an  altar  before  it,  and 
made  proclanxation  by  a  crier's  voice,  saying,  '  to-morrow  is  the  solemnity  of 
the  Lord.'" 


THE    REFORMATION.  183 

1  wonder  whether  Aaron  is  deemed  to  have  been  infallible, 
when  he  sanctioned  idolatry !  Again,  we  read  the  following 
description  of  the  spiritual  guides  of  Israel  : 

"  His  watchmen  are  all  blind,  they  are  all  ignorant,  dumb  dogs,  not  able  to 
bark,  seeing  vain  things,  sleeping  and  loving  dreams,  and  most  impudent 
dogs,  they  never  had  enough :  the  shepherds  themselves  knew  no  understand- 
ing :  all  have  turned  aside  unto  their  own  way,  every  one  after  his  own  gain, 
from  the  fi~st  even  to  the  last.  Come,  let  us  take  wine  and  be  filled  with 
drunkenness :  and  it  shall  be  as  to-day,  so  also  to-morrow,  and  much  more." 
Isaiah,  Ivi,  10. 

In  Malachi,  we  read, 

*'  The  lips  of  the  priest  shall  keep  knowledge,  and  they  shall  seek  the  law 
at  his  mouth,  because  he  is  the  angel  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts." 

What  follows  1 

"  But  you  are  departed  out  of  the  way,  and  have  caused  many  to  stumble  at  the 
law  J  you  have  made  void  the  covenant  of  Levi,  saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts ;  therefore 
have  I  made  you  contemptible^  and  base  before  all  people,  as  you  have  not  kept  my 
toaySj  and  have  accepted  persons  in  the  Zaio." — Chap,  ii,  7,  9. 

So  much  for  the  infallibility  of  the  Jewish  teachers.  My 
friend  has  observed,  that  the  synagogue  and  ecclesiastical  rulers 
were  infallible,  till  Christ  came,  and  that  infallibility  was  then 
transferred  to  Jesus.  I  beg  to  know  at  what  precise  period  the 
prerogative  was  transferred  from  the  Jewish  synagogue  1  Was 
it  while  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  sat  in  Moses'  chair,  anci 
while  Jesus  commanded  the  people  to  hear  them  ?  Was  infalli- 
bility taken  from  them  at  that  time  1  I  have  showed  you  from 
Deuteronomy,  that  miracles  per  se,  alone,  were  not  sufficient  to 
prove  that  even  the  Saviour  was  divinely  commissioned,  unless 
he  also  referred  to  the  testimony  of  Scripture.  I  would  ask, 
was  it  not  said  of  the  Jewish  hierarchy,  "have  any  of  the  Rulers 
or  Pharisees  believed  on  him  ? — (John  vii,  47.) 

Mr.  Maguire  here  interrupted,  and  said — T  told  you  that  the 
synagogue  did  not  err  de  facto  until  the  coming  of  Christ,  but  I 
did  not  say  that  infallibiUty  was  conferred  upon  it  by  God. 

Mr.  Pope — Gentlemen,  Mr.  Maguire  has  said,  that,  although 
infallibility  was  not  the  privilege  of  the  synagogue,  yet  it  never 
erred  de  facto  until  Christ  appeared.  Now  Mr.  Maguire  looks 
upon  the  synagogue  as  having  been  the  representative  of  the 
Jewish  church,  and  Roman  Catholics,  by  analogy  founded  on 
the  Jewish  church,  argue  in  favour  of  the  infallibility  of  their 
own.  I  assert  that  thi)se  who  believed  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ, 
and  followed  the  Saviour,  must  have  done  so  in  opposition  to 
their  rulers,  and  must  ha/e  exercised  their  own  private  }udgment9 
on  the  proofs  that  Jesus  was  the  Son  of  God.  My  friend  asks, 
IS  one  man  to  sei  up  his  judgment  against  many  1      There  are 


184  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

extreme  cases  when  such  a  procedure  may  be  absolutely  neces- 
sary. Such  occurred,  when,  as  I  have  already  observed,  accord- 
ing to  Vincentius  Lirinensis,  (Com.  1,  cap.  6,)  and  Jerome, 
(in  Dial,  contra.  Lucifer,)  the  whole  world  had  become  Arian. 
A  Christian  man,  as  Athanasius  did,  must  at  that  period  have 
stood  out  against  the  whole  world.  Christ  selected  a  few  to 
stand  against  the  many,  nor  should  the  believer  refuse  to  join 
the  persecuted  ranks  of  the  followers  of  Jesus,  though  the  world 
be  against  them. 

In  order  to  show  that  Luther  was  not  the  impetuous  headstrong 
person,  which  his  enemies  represent  him  to  have  been,  permit 
me  to  read  you  a  passage  from  his  writings : 

"  We  allow  that  in  the  Papacy  are  many  good  things ;  and  all  those  good 
things  we  have  retained.  What  we  affirm  is  this ;  that  the  Popes  have  in 
many  instances  corrupted  the  Apostolic  church;  and  have  preferred  their 
own  laws  and  ordinances  to  the  laws  and  ordinances  of  Christ.  Therefore, 
all  that  accumulated  mass  of  human  contrivances,  which  is  of  Satan's  sug- 
gestion, and  contributes  to  the  destrucion  of  the  church  of  God,  rather  than  to 
its  edification,  we  entirely  disapprove  and  reject:  but  stop  here.  We  would 
not  imitate  the  man  who  on  seeing  his  brother  in  the  utmost  danger  of  being 
killed  by  a  wild  boar,  instantly  pierced  both  the  boar  and  and  his  brother  with 
one  thrust  of  his  spear.  Perhaps  Gome  Papists  will  accuse  me  of  flattering 
the  Pope  in  this  instance:  My  answer  is  ;  if  the  Pope  will  bear  such  flat- 
tery as  this,  I  will  become  his  obedient  son  ;  I  will  be  a  good  Papist  and  will 
recant  all  that  I  have  said  to  ofl?end  him." — Com.  de  Luth.  ii,  xl,  13,  14. 

In  other  words,  if  the  errors  of  the  church  of  Rome  were 
removed,  Luther  says,  that  he  would  return  to  her  communion. 

I  shall  also  give  you  the  opinion  of  a  learned  and  grave  Ro- 
man Catholic  divine,  which  will  show  you,  at  whose  door  is  to 
be  laid  the  cause  of  separation.  Cassander  was  appointed  by 
the  two  emperors  Ferdinand  and  Maximillian,  to  endeavour  to 
heal  the  breach  which  had  taken  place  between  the  reformed  and 
the  church  of  Rome.     He  observes, 

"  Yet  I  cannot  deny,  but  that,  in  the  beginning,  many,  out  of  a  godly  zeai 
and  care  were  driven  to  a  sharp  and  severe  reproof  of  certain  manifest  abuses ; 
and  that  the  principal  cause  of  this  calamity  and  distraction  of  the  church  is  to 
be  laid  upon  those,  which  being  puffed  up  with  a  vain  insolent  conceit  of  their 
ecclesiastical  power,  proudly  and  scornfully  contemned  and  rejected  them,  which 
did  rightly  and  modestly  admonish  their  reformation.  Wherefore,  my  opinion 
is,  that  the  church  can  never  hope  for  any  firm  peace,  unless  they  make  the 
beginning,  which  have  given  the  cause  of  this  distraction :  that  is,  unless  those 
which  are  in  place  of  ecclesiatical  government,  will  be  content  to  remit  some- 
thing of  their  too  much  rig-our,  and  yield  somewhat  to  the  peace  o7the  church, 
and  hearkening  unto  the  earnest  prayers  and  admonitions  of  many  godly  men^ 
will  set  themselves  to  correct  manifest  abuses  according  to  the  rule  of  divin^ 
scriptures,  and  of  the  ancient  church  from  which  they  have  swerved,'''* — X^onsult 
pp.  56,  57. 

My  friend  has  told  a  long  story  about  Calvin,  I  could  relat« 
several  strange  stories  ;  for  instance,  about  St.  Anthony  preach 
ing  to  the  fishes,  and  various  other  ludicrous  anecdotes. 


THE    REFORMATION.  185 

I  beg  to  make  an  observation,  relative  to  a  passage  from  a 
Protestant  writer  in  reference  to  the  church  of  Rome  being 
apostoUc.  The  church  of  Rome,  I  admit,  was  pure  in  the  apos- 
toHc  times,  when  Paul  addressed  his  epistle  to  her :  but  I  now 
protest  against  her,  as  having  departed  from  her  great  original, 
and  as  having  added  various  doctrines  and  ordinances  to  those 
revealed  in  the  sacred  scripture.  Mr.  Maguire  will,  doubtless 
ask  me,  where  was  the  church  before  Luther?  I  am  prepared 
to  answer  him. 

Mr.  Maguire. — Mr.  Pope  has  asserted,  that  the  poor  man  is 
placed  under  worse  circumstances  as  to  making  an  act  of  faith, 
according  to  my  priciples,  than  according  to  the  principles  which 
he  advocates.  I  imagined  I  had  satisfactorily  proved  that  it  is 
utterly  impossible  for  any  ignorant  Protestant  to  make  a  prudent 
act  of  fiiith  in  the  insph'ation  of  the  sacred  volume,  unless  he  were 
able  to  examine  every  passage,  compare  every  text,  reconcile 
every  apparent  contradiction,  and  be  prepared  to  solve  every 
doubt,  and  satisfy  his  own  conscience  touchng  the  various  and 
multiplied  objections  of  the  Atheist,  the  Deist,  and  other  infidels. 
Now  as  this  is  impossible  for  an  ignorant  Protestant ;  hence  it  is 
impossible  he  can  make  a  y)rudent  act  of  faith.  Look,  for 
instance,  at  what  are  called  the  lies  of  the  patriarchs  ;  examine 
the  description  and  dimensions  of  Noah's  ark — how  would  the 
ignorant  Protestant  show  that  two  of  every  species  of  animal 
were  contained  therein,  since,  according  to  the  dimensions  given, 
two  whales  alone  could  scarcely  find  accommodation.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  poor  Catholic  has  but  one  simple  solitary  fact  to 
ascertain,  viz. — has  Christ  estabUshed  an  unerring  church,  with 
authority  to  teach  and  judge  for  her  children.  The  moment  this 
one  fact  has  been  ascertained  by  him,  he  can  make  an  act  of 
faith  explicitly  in  the  authority  of  that  church,  and  every  other 
article  of  Revelation  which  she  proposes  to  his  belief.  He  submits 
with  certainty  to  the  authority  of  that  church,  and  he  laughs  to 
scorn  the  accumulated  objections  of  the  deists.  He  may  not, 
I  will  admit,  be  able  to  solve  all  the  doubts  and  difficulties 
collected  by  infidels,  but  he  relies  upon  the  express  promises  of 
Jesus  Christ  to  his  church,  and  believes  in  all  articles  which  that 
church  professes  to  have  received  from  her  Divine  Founder. 

I  am  surprised  that  Mr.  Pope  has  never  essayed  to  answer 
the  questions  which  I  put  to  him  touching  those  articles  of 
Protestant  faith  which  are  not  to  he  found  in  any  part  of  the  sacred 
scriptures. 

In  defence  of  the  Protestant  Reformation,  he  quotes  Dryden 
the  poet,  as  an  authority  of  mighty  importance.  As  the  gentle- 
man deals  S9  largely  in  fiction,  1  cannot  blame  him  for  having 


186  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

recourse  to  the  evidence  of  the  poets.  In  the  present  instance 
however,  he  has  been  singularly  unfortunate,  for  Dryden,  deeply 
deploring  that  he  had  ever  said  or  written  any  thing  against  the 
Catholic  church,  to  which  he  subsequently  became  a  convert, 
had  recourse  to  the  tribunal  of  Confession,  as  the  ordinary  means 
appointed  by  Christ  to  obtain  forgiveness  of  sins.  He  was  en- 
joined by  his  confessor  to  exert  those  rare  talents  which  it  pleased 
God  to  bestow  upon  him,  in  defence  of  the  truth.  He  therefore 
translated  the  life  of  Francis  Xavier,  an  Indian  Roman  Catholic 
Missionary,  equally  esteemed  by  Protestants  and  Catholics,  not 
only  for  the  extent  of  his  missionary  labours,  but  the  simplicity 
purity,  and  self-denial  which  he  manifested  throughout  his  whole 
life.  Dryden  also  wrote  that  curious  poem  called  '  the  Hind  and 
Pvinther,'  in  which  he  describes  the  church  of  England  as  a  hun- 
gry, ferocious  and  prowling  wild  beast,  pursuing  with  open  mouih 
and  merciless  avidity  the  Catholic  church,  which  he  denominates 
a  spotless  Hind.  So  much  for  the  authority  of  Dryden  against 
the  doctrines  of  the  Catholic  church. 

I  appeal  to  all  candid  Protestants  to  say  whether  Mr.  Pope 
has,  in  the  remotest  degree,  approached  the  irrefragable  argu- 
ment which  I  brought  forward  as  to  the  books  of  scripture  ivhich 
have  been  lost,  I  called  upon  him  to  say,  if  all  the  books  of  scrip- 
ture were  necessary.  Supposing  that  he  answered  in  the  affir- 
mative, I  have  proved  that  we  have  not  at  present  all  the  books  of 
scripture,  there  being  full  twenty  of  them  lost,  I  then  placed  him 
in  the  other  alternative,  and  called  upon  him  to  show,  that  a  por- 
tion only  of  the  scripture  would  be  sufficient  for  salvation,  and 
to  establish  his  opinion  by  a  direct  and  positive  text  of  scripture. 
Mr.  Pope  has  quoted  a  text  from  St.  Paul,  where  wrhing  to 
Timothy,  he  says,  that  the  scriptures  are  "  profitable  to  teach,  to 
correct,  to  instruct  in  all  righteousness." 

Is  there  here  a  proof  that  your  sole  rule  of  faith  is  to  be 
founded  upon  any  certain  portion,  or  upon  the  ivhole  of  the  scrip- 
tures ]  I  again  repeat  the  question,  whether  or  not  it  is  neces- 
sary for  salvation  to  know^  the  whole  scriptures,  or  a  portion  of 
them  1  and  I  require  an  answer  from  scripture  to  the  question, 
Mr.  Pope  has,  in  the  above  extract,  quoted  St.  Paul  when  he 
was  writing  to  Timothy,  who  was  not  a  layman,  but  a  bishop 
and  metropolitan  of  Asia.  It  was  the  duty  of  Timothy  to  know 
the  holy  scriptures,  in  order  to  teach  them  to  others.  Was  a 
bishop  bound  to  teach  and  instruct  in  the  holy  scriptures  ?  If  he 
was,  was  he  not  bound  to  know  them  ? 

In  order  to  prove  the  scriptures  to  be  the  sole  rule  of  faith, 
Mr.  Pope  has  asserted,  that  the  Old  Testament  was  ordered  tc  be 
read  in  many  places.  But  he  should  recollect,  that  it  was  to  be 
interpreted  according  to  the  synagogue. 


THE    REFORMATION.  187 

No  wonder  a  bishop  is  to  understand  the  scriptures,  when  ho 
is  obHged  to  preach  and  expound  them.  Such  must  be  the  pro- 
vince of  the  bishops  and  clergy,  or  every  man  may  assert  for 
himself  the  right  of  preaching.  I  ask,  in  the  presence  of  Pro* 
testant  bishops,  whether  it  be  the  right  of  every  tinker  and  low 
ignorant  mechanic  to  take  upon  them  to  "  teach,  to  preach,  to 
correct,  and  instruct?" 

Our  Saviour  said,  "search  the  scriptures."  It  is  perfectly 
right  to  do  so.  The  Redeemer  appealed  to  the  common  sense 
of  the  Jews  to  decide  upon  the  proofs  of  his  divine  mission.  To 
what  else  should  we  appeal,  but  to  the  common  sense  of  a  man 
before  he  '^ecognizes  authority  ?  I  have  already  informed  you, 
that  every  man  is  to  employ  his  common  sense  to  discover  the 
marks  of  the  church  of  Christ.  But  when  he  discovers  those 
marks  of  the  true  church,  he  at  once  submits  his  judgment  to  her 
authority.  Immediately  after  the  text,  "search  the  scriptures," 
as  quoted  by  Mr.  Pope,  the  Saviour  adds,  "  for  in  them  you 
think  you  have  eternal  life."  This  is  a  manifest  proof,  that 
eternal  life  is  not  to  be  found  in  them  alone,  otherwise  Christ 
would  not  have  said,  "for  in  them  you  think.^^ 

I  should  much  wish  that  the  advocate  of  unlimited  private  judg- 
ment would  not  endeavour  to  force  his  own  opinions  upon  others. 

Mr.  Pope  has  quoted  passages  from  Catholic  writers  regard- 
ing the  promoting  causes  of  the  Reformation.  All  allow  that  a 
reibrmation  was  required,  but  it  was  a  reformation  of  morals  and 
discipline,  and  not  a  change  in  religion.  If  any  man  will  say 
that  a  reformation  in  the  doctrines  of  the  church  of  Christ  was 
required,  I  shall  only  remind  him  of  the  words  of  St.  Paul : 

"But  though  I  or  an  angel  from  heaven  preach  a  gospel  to  you,  besides 
that  which  we  have  preached  to  you,  let  him  be  anathema." 

The  doctrine  then  of  the  church  of  Christ  never  was  to  he 
changed.  There  was  to  be  no  other  doctrine.  Will  it  be  said 
by  my  opponent  that  the  promises  of  Christ  to  his  church  failed 
—that  she  fell  into  error — that  all  had  become  heretics,  and  that 
therefore  Luther  and  Calvin  were  justified  in  adding  to,  and 
reforming  the  doctrines  of  the  church  1 

The  despotic  conduct  of  the  clergy  proves  nothing,  when 
adduced  to  show  that  a  reformation  was  required  in  doctrine-  I 
admit  that  it  was  principally  bishops  and  ecclesiastics  who 
broached  heresies,  and  erected  heretical  churches,  and  not  the 
poor — but  that  only  proves  the  danger  which  arises  from  reading 
and  interpreting  the  scriptures  without  the  due  dispositions  ;  and 
strongly  illustrates  the  effects  which  would  flow  from  an  indis- 
criminate circulation  of  the  sacred  scriptures  without  note  or 
comment.  If  those  who  had  devoted  their  lives  to  the  study  of 
the  scriptures,  should  happen  to  be  led  into  error,  how  much 


188  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

more  might  we  expect  that  the  poor  ignorant  man  would,  m 
perusing  them,  adopt  erroneous  opinions  1  Mr.  Pope  not  only 
charges  error  to  the  account  of  the  Catholic  church,  but  he 
admits  that  the  church  of  Hyigland  is  wrongs  for  he  protests  against 
twenty-one  out  of  her  ihirty-nine  published  articles  of  belief.  Con- 
sequently he  must  believe  that  the  church  of  England  teaches 
that  which  is  not  true.  And  I  have  no  doubt  but  I  myself  am  a 
better  church  of  England  man  than  my  friend  Mr.  Pope.  Mr. 
Pope  has  said  that  our  Saviour  did  not  come  to  reform  the 
Jewish  church. 

Mr.  Pope. — What  I  said  was,  that  he  came  to  give  perfec 
tion  to  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  by  the  establishment  of  the  full 
Christian  economy. 

Mr.  Maguire. — What  is  perfecting  a  law,  but  reforming  it  ? 
I  affirm  that  Christ  came  to  reform  the  law  of  Moses,  as  Moses 
reformed  the  religion  of  the  patriarchs.  One  of  the  tenets  of  the 
Jewish  rehgion  was,  that  a  man  may  turn  away  his  wife,  on  any 
pretext,  and  take  another.  This,  with  many  other  points  of  the 
moral  code,  has  been  altered  in  the  dispensation  of  Christ.  I 
therefore  affirm  that  Christ  came  to  reform  the  Jewish  law  ;  and 
he  himself  tells  th-e  Jews,  that  if  he  had  not  done  the  works 
which  he  performed,  those  who  refused  to  believe  in  him  would 
have  no  sin  in  them. 

Here  our  Saviour  directly  appeals  to  miracles  in  proof  of  the 
truth  of  his  mission.  I  believe  that  the  Son  of  the  Almighty  God 
performed  those  miracles  in  order  that  the  Jewish  people  might 
have  no  excuse  left  them.  Christ  appealed  to  miracles — surely 
that  will  not  be  denied.  Mr.  Pope  says  that  our  Saviour  came 
to  restore  the  Mosaic  law.  Would  God  have  punished  the  man 
with  death  who  departed  from  that  law,  if  he  intended  that  such 
an  authority  should  lead  into  error  1  Mr.  Pope  will  say  that  the 
synagogue  rejected  Christ.  I  assert  that  the  synagogue  did  not 
err  till  the  coming  of  the  Redeemer  was  proved  by  manifest  mira- 
cles, and  the  mission  of  him  established  of  whom  Moses  said, 

"  The  Lord  thy  God  will  raise  up  to  thee  a  prophet  of  thy  nation,  and  of 
tliy  brethren,  like  unto  me :  hear  ye  Aim." 

When  Christ  did  come,  the  three  kings  from  the  east,  who 
sought  him,  called  on  Herod  to  know  where  was  the  promised 
Messiah  to  be  found.  Herod  relied  not  on  his  private  judgment; 
he  sent  to  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  who  sat  in  the  chair  oj 
Moses,  and  they  all  agreed  it  was  in  Bethlehem  of  Juda,  that 
the  Redeemer  was  to  be  born  ;  and  they  quoted  the  words  of  the 
prophet.  The  Jews,  therefore,  who  refused  to  believe  in  Christ 
had  no  excuse  ;  they  were  inexcusable  for  not  believing  in  his 


THE    REFORMATION.  189 

mission,  respecting  which  all  the  predictions  of  the  prophets 
concurred.  I  have  proved  to  you  that  Christ  reformed  the 
Jewish  religion  ;  but  I  do  not  say  that  he  introduced  a  perfectly 
new  religion.  As  our  Saviour  then  appealed  to  miracles  when 
he  came  to  reform  the  law  of  Moses,  we  are  justly  entitled  to 
call  for  miracles  on  the  part  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  who  pretended 
that  they  came  to  reform  our  church,  which  had  continued  from 
the  days  of  Christ  for  fifteen  hundred  years.  Will  it  be  said  by 
any  man,  that  the  reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century,  referred  to 
miracles  in  proof  of  their  mission? 

I  call  upon  Mr.  Pope  to  produce  any  Catholic  historian  of 
established  credit,  who  admits  that  any  other  reformation  was 
required  than  that  of  morals  and  discipline.  Erasmus,  who 
wrote  more  licentiously  on  that  subject  than  any  other  Catholic 
with  whose  works  I  am  acquainted,  did  admit  a  reformation  in 
morals  and  discipline — but  decidedly  not  in  doctrine,  I  insist 
that  I  have  established  the  fact,  that  till  the  coming  of  Christ, 
the  Jewish  synagogue  did  not  err  in  doctrine  ;  or,  in  other  words, 
that  it  was  infallible. — Our  Saviour  says  to  his  disciples — 

"  The  Scribes  and  Pharisees  have  sat  in  the  chair  of  Moses.  All,  there- 
fore, whatsoever  they  shall  say  to  you,  observe  and  do  ;  but  according  to 
their  work  do  ye  not." 

Here  our  divine  Lord,  though  about  to  introduce  a  more  per- 
fect dispensation,  refers  his  disciples  to  the  authority  of  the 
established  teachers,  until  he  had  revealed  the  object  of  his  mis- 
sion. Did  the  soi-disant  reformers  do  so  l  Christ,  therefore, 
referred  the  Jews  to  the  existing  authorities,  nor  did  he  recall 
that  advice  till  he  had  established  his  own  church  on  the  basis  of 
innumerable  miracles,  Christ  als-o  gave  to  his  Apostles  the  power 
of  working  miracles,  in  order  to  the  diffusion  and  establishment 
of  his  church  on  earth.  I  suppose  Mr.  Pope  will  admit  that 
miracles  were  wrought  in  the  primitive  church.  As  to  the  argu- 
ment which  he  deduced  from  the  conduct  of  some  Popes,  I  have 
already  shown  to  you  that  there  is  a  wide  diflerence  between 
doctrines  of  faith  and  morality,  between  infallibility  and  impec- 
cability. The  Apostle  Peter  sinned,  but  he  could  not  err  in 
fliith,  for  he  was  inspired.  Infallibility  is  the  attribute  of  the 
body  of  the  church  in  globo — it  does  not  exist  in  the  individual 
members,  but  in  the  collective  body  of  the  faithful.  There  are 
many  qualities  which  belong  to  the  body  corporate^  and  which  aro 
not  found  in  the  individuals  composing  that  body.  For  exam- 
ple, the  vote  of  a  single  individual  in  Parliament  avails  nothing, 
but  the  votes  of  the  collective  body,  form  the  law  of  the  land. 

Mr.  Pope  says,  that  Aaron  is  to  be  charged  with  the  worship 
of  the  golden  calf — I  did  not  say,  that  Aaron  was  infallible — 
but  1  affirm,  that  Moses  was  a  greater  authority  than   Aaron- 


199  THE     JUSTIFICATION     OF 

Aaron  had  only  an  ordinary — Moses  an  extraordinary  mission. 
When  Moses  was  speaking  with  God  on  the  mountain,  he  inter- 
ceded with  the  Ahnighty  for  the  IsraeHtes,  and  prevailed  upon 
God  to  forgive  them.  He  prayed  to  God  if  he  should  not  for- 
give them,  to  blot  his  name  out  of  the  book  of  life.  God  dia 
forgive  them,  and  remitted  in  a  wonderful  measure  the  punish- 
ment decreed  against  them. 

Our  divine  Lord  came  to  establish  an  authority  above  that  of 
the  Jewish  synagogue,  and  he  performed  miracles  to  give  an 
undoubted  assurance  to  his  mission.  John  the  Baptist  referred 
to  the  miracles  which  he  knew  Christ  would  perform,  and  Christ 
appealed  to  the  prophecies  of  John  the  Baptist.  This  perhaps 
will  be  called  by  Mr.  Pope  a  circulus  vitiosus,  and  yet  he  cannot 
doubt  the  reality  of  the  miracles  of  Christ.  My  reverend  oppo- 
nent has  asked  whether  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  who  sat  in 
the  chair  of  Moses,  did  not  oppose  Christ  ?  Certainly — but  it 
remains  to  be  shown,  that  they  publicly  condemned  Christ  until 
their  authority  was  superseded  by  a  greater  authority  sent  from 
God,  Christ  Jesus  his  Son. 

Mr.  Pope  has  referred  to  the  times  of  the  Arians,  and  has 
quoted  St.  Jerome,  as  saying  the  world  was  astonished  to  find 
itself  Arian  at  once.  I  admit  this  hyperbole  on  the  part  of  St. 
Jerome  ;  but  it  is  one  that  can  be  easily  explained.  Liberius, 
Mr.  Pope  informs  us,  signed  the  confession  of  Sirmium.  Dr. 
Cave,  a  greater  man  than  Mr.  Pope,  in  his  Life  of  Athanasius, 
declares  that  it  is  not  known  whether  it  was  the  confession  at 
Sardica  or  Sirmium,  which  was  signed  by  Pope  Liberius.  Now, 
as  it  is  a  matter  of  historical  doubt,  which  Mr.  Pope  himself 
cannot  clear  up,  and  which  the  learned  Dr.  Cave  was  unable  to 
decide,  am  I  not  at  Hberty  to  doubt,  whether  Liberius  signed 
either  the  one  or  the  other  1  But  admitting  the  fact,  I  deny  that 
it  necessarily  follows,  that  Liberius  became  an  Arian.  I  believe 
1  can  easily  show,  that  the  very  reverse  is  true.  Liberius,  a 
good  and  pious  man.  according  to  Dr.  Cave,  was  banished  into 
Thrace  by  the  Arian  emperor,  because  he  refused  to  sign  a 
formulary  of  faith  which  had  been  previously  subscribed  by  the 
Sirmium  bishops.  In  this  state  of  exile  he  continued  for  two 
years,  suffering  such  hardships  and  privations  as  our  modern 
saints  would  scarcely  endure.  He  was  at  length  permitted  to 
return,  if  we  may  believe  Theodoret,  at  the  intercession  of  the 
Roman  ladies,  who,  making  a  very  imposing  appearance,  waited 
upon  the  emperor,  as  he  entered  their  city,  and  obtained  hh 
consent,  that  their  venerated  pontiff  should  return  to  the  dis« 
charge  of  his  duties.  Granting,  I  say,  that  at  his  return  he  was 
prevailed  upon  to  sign  the  Sirmium  confession,  it  remain?  foi 
Mr.  Pope  to  show  that  this  confession  icas  Arian. 


THE    REFORMATION.  191 

Now,  I  affirm,  in  the  face  of  a  learned  body  of  men,  that  the 
formulary  subscribed  by  the  bishops  at  Sirmium  was  purely 
orthodox ;  and  that  the  only  objection  to  it  was,  that  it  did  not 
contain  the  word  ojnovaioy,  which  was  introduced  at  the  council 
of  Nice.  But  in  all  other  respects  it  condemned  and  anathe- 
matised the  Arian  heresy^  as  may  be  seen  by  the  most  superfi- 
cial observer,  by  glancing  over  the  confession  itself.  Liberius, 
therefore,  might  justly  conclude  that  the  word  o^ovuiov  was  not 
essential  to  our  orthodox  formulary  of  faith,  especially  as  it  was 
wholly  unknown  to  antiquity.  The  Arians,  finding  that  this 
formulary  had  been  signed  by  many  truly  orthodox  bishops, 
immediately  cried  out,  that  the  Catholic  prelates  gave  their 
solemn  sanction  to  Arianism.  The  people  who  were  not  pre- 
sent, but  who  had  heard  of  the  subscription,  were  alarmed  and 
astonished  at  the  reports  so  industriously  circulated  ;  and  hence 
St.  Jerome  used  that  well-known  expression,  that  the  whole 
world  was  astonished  to  find  itself  Arian.  But  the  falsehoods 
of  the  Arians  were  shortly  detected,  and  the  faithful  restored  to 
confidence  and  peace.  So  much  for  the  hyperbole  of  the  great 
and  good  St.  Jerome. 

Mr.  Pope. — Gentlemen :  as  to  Pope  Liberius,  Dupin,  to 
whom  I  have  already  alluded,  admits,  that  it  is  doubtful  whether 
he  subscribed  the  first  or  second  confession  of  Sirmium ;  but 
there  is  no  question  as  to  his  having  signed  the  condemnation 
of  Athanasius,  (2  vol.  p.  62,  1697,  3d.  ed.  Lond.  fol.)  From 
his  letter  as  given  in  Baronius  and  Hilary,  it  is  evident  that  he 
ratified  the  sentence  passed  by  the  Arians  against  Athanasius. — 
Baron.  Tom.  i,  p.  939,  ad.  ann.  257,  No  46,  Mayence,  1601.— 
Liberius's  letter  is  given  in  the  fragm.  of  St.  Hilary,  vi,- — Ex. 
oper.  Hist.  p.  1335,  Benedict,  edit.  I  ask  my  friend,  if  a 
Christian  man,  in  the  days  of  Liberius,  vvas  not  called  upon  to 
stand  alone  against  the  whole  word  ]  Mr.  Maguire  h^s  stated, 
that,  according  to  my  principles,  the  poor  man  is  in  a  worse 
condition,  than  if  his  principles  were  adopted.  He  remarked, 
that  if  he  could  prove  to  the  poor  man  the  infallibility  of  his 
church,  all  his  difficulties  would  immediately  vanish?  I  reply, 
that  in  order  to  induce  the  poor  man  to  believe  that  the  church 
of  Re  me  is  infallible,  Mr.  Maguire  must  appeal  to  the  Bible  : 
and  if  the  poor  man  should  make  objections  to  the  inspired 
records,  Mr.  Maguire  must  explain  to  him  every  difficulty  with 
which  he  may  happen  to  charge  the  sacred  page  ;  so  that  my 
opponent  must  convince  him,  that  the  Bible  is  the  book  of  God, 
before  he  can  possibly  succeed  in  proving  that  (he  church  of 
Rome  is  infallible.  As  to  the  poor  Protestant  v.ho  has  received 
the  knowledge  of  divine  truth,  though  he  may  not  be  able  to 


192  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

explain  every  difficulty,  yet  is  he  convinced  that  the  sacred 
scriptures  have  proceeded  from  heaven,  because  he  himself  has 
experienced  in  his  own  soul  their  sanctifying  influence,  and  has 
the  witness  to  their  truth  in  himself.  In  the  passage  relative  to 
Timothy's  having  known  the  scriptures,  Mr.  Maguire  has  omit- 
ted the  words,  "  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  thoroughly 
furnished  unto  every  good  work."  Now,  I  would  ask,  was 
Timo.hy  a  clergyman  while  a  child  ?  Was  he  a  learned  divine 
when  he  was  a  little  boy  ?  Was  he  like  those  which  we  have 
heard  described,  beardless  boys,  exercising  spiritual  jurisdiction 
in  the  church  of  Rome,  and  arrogating  authority  over  the  bodies 
and  souls  of  men  1  Timothy  read  the  Old  Testament  scrip- 
tures— R  fortiori  the  scriptures  of  the  New  Testament  should  be 
read ;  for,  confessedly,  the  Old  Testament  is  the  more  difficult 
portion  of  the  sacred  volume.  If  St.  Paul  commends  Timothy, 
that  "  from  a  child,"  "  ano  ^gecfovg,^^  he  knew  the  scriptures, 
does  not  this  fact  supply  us  with  an  argument  for  placing  the 
inspired  records  in  the  hands  of  the  young  1  But  I  must  not 
forget  that  Mr.  Maguire  has  said,  that  Timothy  read  the  scrip- 
tures, as  they  were  interpreted  by  the  synagogue.  Permit  me 
to  observe,  that  if  Timothy  had  understood  the  scripture  accord 
ing  to  the  interpretation  of  the  synagogue,  he  would  have  rejected 
the  Messiah! 

My  friend's  comment  on  the  w^ords  "  in  them  you  think  you 
have  eternal  life,"  is  evidently  at  variance  with  the  object  which 
the  Saviour  had  in  view  in  making  the  observation  :  he  intended 
to  charge  the  Jews  with  practical  inconsistency: — "Ye  search 
the  scriptures — in  those  scriptures  ye  believe  that  eternal  life  is 
contained,  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of  me,  and  yet,  not- 
withstanding, ye  will  not  come  unto  me,  that  ye  may  have  life." 
Mr.  Maguire  has  acknowledged,  that  a  moral  reformation  was 
called  for  in  the  church  of  Rome,  but  says  that  I  could  not  prove 
from  Roman  Catholic  authorities,  that  a  reformation  in  doctrine 
was  required.  It  is  altogether  unreasonable  to  expect,  that  such 
an  acknowledgement  should  be  found  in  Roman  Catholic  di- 
vines. They  judged  according  to  their  own  standard  of  faith  ; 
and  if  they  were  consistent,  they  could  not  reject  any  doctrine 
advocated  by  the  authority  of  their  church. 

Cassander,  indeed,  remarks,  in  the  passage  already  referred 
to,  that 

"  Ecclesiastics  should  set  themselves,  to  correct  manifest  abuses  according 
to  tht  rule  of  divine  Kriptures,  and  the  primitive  churchy  from  which  thet 
HAVE  SWERVED." — Consult.  pp.  56,  57. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  again  said,  no  man  can  reform  the  church 
of  Christ  without  performing  miracles.  He  has  again  begged 
the  question,  by  identifying  the  church  of  Rome  with  the  church 


THE    REFORMATION.  193 

of  Christ.  This  day  her  doctrines  have  been  contrasted  with 
those  contained  in  the  sacred  volume,  and  you  will  decide 
whether  they  accord.  My  opponent  has  observed  that  the 
Saviour  stated,  that  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  sat  in  Moses's 
scat,  and  that  he  exhorted  thie  people  to  hear  them.  But  I 
would  asl:,  were  they,  therefore,  infallible  ?  Let  any  man  ex- 
amine the  gospels,  and  he  will  find  that  the  outcry  and  opposition 
against  the  Redeemer  were  principally  raised  by  them.  They 
were  to  be  heard,  while  reading  the  books  of  Moses,  but  not 
when  uttering  their  own  traditions,  which  the  Saviour  so  pointedly 
condemned.  The  Jesuit  Maldonate  explains  the  passsage  in 
the  same  way ;  indeed,  it  cannot  with  any  possibility  be  other- 
wise expounded — 

"  When  Christ  (saith  he)  bids  observe,  and  do  what  the  Scribes  and  Phari- 
sees say,  while  they  sit  in  Moses'  seat,  he  speaks  not  of  their  doctrine,  but  of 
the  dock-ine  of  the  law,  and  of  Moses.  For  it  is,  as  if  he  should  say,  all  things 
that  the  law  and  Moses  shall  say  unto  you,  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  rehears- 
ing it,  observe  and  do,  but  after  their  works  do  not." — Maid,  ad  Matt,  xxiii.  23. 

.  Mr.  Maguire  has  adduced  the  opinion  of  Erasmus — now,  as 
he  died  a  Roman  Catholic,  Mr.  Maguire  will,  perhaps,  admit  his 
opinion  of  Luther  as  a  theologian  : 

"  There  is  more  sound  theology  in  one  passage  of  his  (Luther's)  commen- 
taries than  in  many  large  volumes  of  the  schoolmen  and  other  such  writers." 
Arid  again, 

"I  am  more  instructed  and  edified  by  one  pagv.  '^f  Luther,  than  by  the 
whole  woj-k  of  Aquinas." 

My  opponent  has  remarked,  that  friars  and  priests  by  their 
learning  became  the  authors  of  heresies.  I  would  ask,  is  it  the 
wish  of  my  opponent  that  none  should  be  learned,  because 
learning  has  been  abused  ?  I  repeat  a  former  observation,  if 
the  abuse  of  the  scriptures  furnish  a  reason  on  account  of  which 
they  should  be  withheld  from  any  portion  of  mankind,  they  should 
he  taken  from  priests  and  friars^  ivho  have  perverted  them,  and 
given  to  the  people  who  have  never  abused  them.  My  friend  has 
told  us,  that  Christ  came  to  reform  the  church.  He  came  to 
give  a  fuller  developement  to  revealed  truth.  The  shadows  of 
the  Mosiac  dispensation  were  to  flee  away,  and  the  rays  of 
divine  light,  which  had  pointed  to  Christ,  were  now  to  be  con- 
centrated in  him,  as  the  sun  of  the  system.  The  reformers,  oa 
the  other  hand,  were  not  to  unfold  a  fuller  dispensiation,  but  to 
return  to  original  principles.  It  was  their's  to  remove  the  rub- 
bish which  nearly  overwhelmed  the  edifice  of  truth,  and  to  lay 
it  open  to  our  view  in  the  beauty  of  its  original  proportions; 
To  employ  an  illustration,  which  has  elsewhere  been  used — 
suppose  a  number  of  individuals  had  bound  themselves  by  cer^ 
tain  laws,  a  copy  of  which  was  hung  up  for  the  view  of  the  per- 
«ons  who  composed  the  society.     Abuses  nowever  grad    lUy 

IT 


194  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

crept  in,  and  the  larger  portion  of  the  members  succeeded  in 
removing  the  table  of  laws.  Should  not  the  minority  demand, 
that  the  code  of  regulations  should  be  again  produced,  and  thai 
the  system  should  be  modelled  afresh  by  the  standard  of  recti- 
tude and  truth?  Mr.  Maguire  has  again  introduced  the  doctrine 
of  infallibil'ty.  Suppose  that  I  should  grant  for  a  moment,  for 
argument's  sake,  that  a  man  is  convinced  that  the  church  of 
Rome  is  infallible,  (though  I  am  most  thoroughly  persuaded  that 
no  infallible  tribunal  exists)  of  what  benefit  can  .he  supposed 
infiUibility  of  the  church  of  Rome  be  to  her  votaries,  if  the 
instrument  or  medium  of  conveying  its  decrees  to  them  be  not 
infallible  also  ?  The  priest,  in  the  interpretation  of  decrees  and 
councils,  must  distinguish  between  what  is  to  be  rejected  and 
what  is  to  be  received,  and,  if  not  infallible,  may  himself  err. 
And,  again,  the  individual  to  whom  the  priest  addresses  himself, 
may,  if  not  infallible,  misconceive  his  meaning,  even  though  the 
priest  should  deliver  the  mind  of  his  church  aright.  Mr.  Maguire 
has  referred  to  the  Old  Testament,  to  prove  that  disobedience  to 
the  voice  of  the  priest  was  punished  with  death.  My  opponent 
should  remember,  that  in  Judea  the  law  of  God  was  the  law  of 
the  land,  Moses  having  dehvered  as  well  the  political  as  the 
moral  law  to  the  chosen  people  of  God.  The  Jewish  priest- 
hood were  specially  set  apart  for  the  study  of  that  which  at  once 
was  the  religious  and  the  civil  polity  of  the  Jews.  In  difficult 
cases  the  magistrate  therefore  appealed  to  their  opinion,  and 
their  verdict  decided  the  question.  Government  invests  its 
judges  with  authority  to  put  to  death :  we  do  not  argue  that  they 
are  consequently  infallible.  Though  it  be  distinctly  written, 
**  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God,  and  he  that  resisteth, 
shall  receive  to  himself  damnation,"  (Rom.  xiii,  1,)  it  does  not 
follow,  that  "  the  powers  that  be,"  are  infallible.  As  to  Herod's 
appeal  to  the  priests,  we  may  suppose  that  he  was  not  acquainted 
with  the  prophecies.  Did  the  Jewish  teachers  merely  offer  their 
own  opinion  on  the  subject  of  his  inquiry?  No,  they  referred 
to  the  words  of  the  prophet. 

[And  applied  them,  observed  Mr.  Maguire  ] 

Mr.  Maguire  has  talked  of  the  miracles  of  Xavier.  I  suppose 
that  they  may  be  paralleled  with  one  recorded  by  a  cardinal. 
We  are  told — 

"As  St.  Anthony  was  disputing  concerning  the  truth  of  the  Lord's  body  in 
the  Eucharist  with  a  heretic,  the  heretic  required  of  Anthony  this  sign :  Says 
the  heretic,  "  I  have  a  mule,  to  which  I  shall  give  no  meat  these  three  days. 
After  the  three  day's  end,  come  thou  with  the  sacrament,  and  1  will  conie 
with  my  mule,  and  will  pour  out  provender  before  it ;  if  the  mule  leave  his 
provender,  and  come  and  venerate  the  sacrament,  I  will  believe.'  These 
conditions  were  accepted,  and  after  three  days,  St.  Anthony  approached, 
bringing  the  sacrament.     The  mule  for£;etting  his  provender  and  his  hunger, 


THE    REFORMATION.  195 

went  forthwith  towan/s  the  hand  of  sainted  Anthony!!" — Bellarmine  de 
Sacra  ra.  Euchar.  hb.  iii,  cap.  8,  prope  finem.     . 

In  reference  to  laymen,  T  would  suggest  to  my  friend,  that  in 
speaking  of  the  superiority  of  Moses  to  Aaron,  he  should  bear 
in  mind  that  Moses  was  a  layman.  We  are  told  that  Moses 
interceded  for  the  people,  so  did  Paul ;  but  though  while  they 
were  on  earth,  they  did  so,  does  it  follow  that  they  do  so  now  in 
heaven ;  if,  while  they  could  be  seen,  and  while  men  could  in 
person  request  them  to  pray  in  their  behalf,  they  complied  with 
their  solicitations,  does  it  follow  that  they  pray  for  us  now  in 
heaven,  or  can  hear  our  petitions  there.  I  did  not  say  that  our 
Saviour  did  not  refer  to  his  miracles  ;  I  stated  that  he  appealed 
to  the  written  word,  as  well  as  to  his  works,  and  not  exclusively 
to  the  latter.  I  am  asked,  .where  was  the  church  of  Christ 
before  the  Reformation  ?  I  answer,  the  church  of  Christ  is  not 
confined  to  any  one  denomination.  I  hope  that  even  now  some 
of  its  members  are  to  be  found  in  the  church  of  Rome :  but  I 
would  say  to  any  such  that  may  remain  within  her  pale, 

"  Come  out  of  her,  my  people,  that  ye  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins,  and  that 
ye  receive  not  of  her  plagues." — Apocalypse,  xviii,  4. 

The  members  of  Christ's  body  were  found  protesting  against 
the  church  of  Rome  long  before  the  Reformation — the  Wick- 
liffites  in  England,  and  the  Bohem.ians  and  the  Waldensea 
abroad.  We  shall  show,  upon  Roman  Catholic  testimony,  thai 
the  principles  of  the  Reformation  were  only  the  tenets  of  the 
Waldenses  revived.  Ecchius  reproached  Luther  with  renewing 
the  heresies  of  the  Waldenses.  Lindanus,  Roman  Catholic 
bishop  of  Ghent,  (1650,)  terms  Calvin  "  the  inheritor  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  Waldenses."  Mezeray,  the  celebrated  historio- 
grapher of  France,  in  his  abridgment  of  Chronology,  says — 
"  The  Waldenses  held  nearly  the  same  opinions  as  those  who 
are  now  called  Calvinists." 

Let  us  now  determine  the  antiquity  of  the  W^aldenses  upon 
Roman  Catholic  authority.  Reinerius  Saccho,  an  inquisitor, 
and  the  most  inveterate  enemy  of  the  Waldenses,  gives  the 
following  account  of  them : 

"  Inter  omnes  has  sectas,  quae  adhue  sunt,  vel  fueruut,  non  est  perniciosior 
ecclesiae  quam  Leonistarum ;  et  hoc  tribus  de  causis ;  prima  est,  quia  est 
diuturnior;  alique  enim  dicunt,  quod  duravit  ^  tempore  Sylvestri;  aliqui  5 
tempore  Apostolorum.  Secunda,  quia  est  generalior ;  fere  enim  nulla  est 
terra,  in  qua  haec  secta  non  est.  Tertia,  quia  cum  omnes  aliae  sectse,  imma- 
nitate  blasphemiarum  in  Deum,  audientibus  horrorem  inducunt,  haec  magnum 
habet  speciem  pietatis,  eo  quod  coram  hominibus  justi  vivant,  et  bene  omnia 
de  Deo  credant,  et  omnes  articulos  qui  in  symbolo  continentur ;  solummodo 
Romanum  Ecclesiam  blasphemant  et  clerum." 

"  Among  all  the  sects  (there  were  sects,  you  perceive,  before  the  Reforma- 
tion,) which  still  are,  or  have  been,  there  is  not  one  more  pernicious  to  the 
church  than  that  of  the  Leonites ;  (a  name  by  which  the  WaMcnses  were 


196  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

sometimes  called)  and  that  for  three  reasons.  The  first  is,  because  it  is  tha 
oldest,  for  some  say  it  hath  endured  from  the  time  of  Pope  Silvester ;  othera, 
from  the  time  of  the  Apostles.  The  second,  because  it  is  more  general,  for 
there  is  scarce  any  country  where  this  sect  is  not.  The  third,  because  when 
all  other  sects  beget  horror  by  their  blasphemies  against  God,  this  of  tne 
Leonites  hath  a  great  show  of  piety,  because  they  live  justly  before  men,  ard 
beheve  all  things  rightly  concernmg  God,  and  all  the  articles  contained  in 
the  creed." 

What  then  was  the  head  and  front  of  their  offending?  Reine- 
lius  adds, 

"Only  they  blaspheme  the  church  of  Rome  and  the  clergy." — (Ron. 
Saccho.  edit.  Gretzer,  O.  S.  J.  cap.  iv,  p.  54.) 

I  shall  lay  before  you  another  testimony.  When  some  car- 
dinals and  prelates  accused  the  Waldenses  in  Merindol  and 
Cabriers,  of  grievous  crimes,  and  urged  Lewis  XII,  to  root 
them  out;  the  Waldenses,  having  notice  thereof,  sent  their 
deputies  to  his  majesty  to  declare  their  innocence.  The  pre- 
lates were  instant  upon  the  king,  not  to  give  them  any  audience ; 
but  the  king  answered,  that  if  he  were  to  make  war  against  the 
Turk,  he  would  previously  hear  him.  The  king  accordingly 
sent  Adam  Fume,  his  master  of  requests,  and  doctor  Parvi,  b's 
confessor,  to  search  and  inquire  both  into  their  life  and  religion. 
The  commissioners  visited  those  places,  and  upon  their  return, 
reported  to  the  king  the  result  of  their  examination,  namely — 

"  That  men  were  baptized — the  articles  of  faith,  and  the  ten  command- 
ments were  taught — the  Lord's  dayobseived — the  word  of  God  preached, 
and  no  show  of  wickedness  or  fornication  to  be  perceived  amongst  them  : 
but  that  they  found  not  any  inmges  in  their  churches,  nor  any  ornaments 
belonging  to  the  mass." 

The  king  hearing  this  report  of  the  commissioners,  said,  (and 
he  bound  it  with  an  oath)  "  That  they  were  better  men  than  he,  or 
the  rest  of  his  Catholic  subjects.^^ 

"  Tumrex  etiamsi,  inquit,  nihi  in  Turcam  aut  diabolum  bellum  suscipiendum 
?sset  cos  tamen  prius  audire  vellem." — Wesembecii  Oratio  de  Valdens,  u. 
418,  extat  in  Joach.  Camerarii  Histor.  Narrations  de  Fratrum.  Orthod.  Ecc' 
in  Bohemia. 

"lUi  ad  regem  referunt,  illis  in  locis  homines  baptizari,  articulos  fidf  <:i 
decalogum  doceri,  dominicos  dies  religiose  coli,  Dei  verbum  exponi,  venefic'a 
et  stnpra  apud  eos  nulla  esse.  His  auditis  rex,  Jurejunando  addito,  me, 
inquit,  et  cetero  popula  meo  Catholico  meliores  illi  viri  sunt." — Ibid.  p.  419. 

"Ceterum  se  m  ipsorum  temphs  neque  imagines  neque  ornamenta  mis?TB 
ulja  reperisse." — Ibid. 

When,  therefore,  I  am  asked,  where  was  your  religion  before 
the  days  of  Luther,  though  I  might  point  to  the  Bible  and  answN;;r 
**  in  the  Bible," — as  God  did  not  leave  himself  without  witnesses, 
[  can  refer  to  the  Waldenses,  and  trace  their  origin  up  to  a 
period,  when,  comparatively  speaking,  the  church  was  in  a  stale 
of  purity.  Faber,  in  his  Difficulties  of  Romanism,  has  chal- 
lenged any  Roman  Catholic  divine,  undertaking  to  show  froni 


THE    REFORMATION.  !97 

the  early  Fathers,  that  the  doctrines  of  the  primitive  church  were 
in  accordance  with  the  doctrines  of  Protestantism. 

I  have  called  upon  my  friend  to  bring  forward  his  proofs 
against  the  justification  of  the  Reformation — now,  perhaps,  we 
shall  have  a  flourish  of  trumpets.  I  have  stated,  that  the  separ- 
ation was  imperatively  called  for  by  the  moral  debasement  and 
unscriptural  doctrines  of  the  church  of  Rome — still  I  would  say 
come  to  the  question  ;  disprove,  Mr.  Maguire,  if  you  can,  the 
immoral  condition  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and  the  unscriptural 
character  of  her  doctrines.  On  these  grounds,  I  repeat,  the 
reformers  were  justified  in  separating  from  her  communion ; 
show  that  they  were  not  justified  in  that  separation.  I  am  con- 
vinced that  you  will  not  be  able  to  do  so.  Then  let  the  empire 
give  in  its  verdict,  that  the  Reformation  was  called  for  by  the 
moral  degradation,  and  by  the  anti-scriptural  doctrines  of  the 
church  of  Rome. 

Mr.  MAtiUiRE. — Mr.  Pope  has  talked  of  a  challenge  published 
by  a  Mr.  Faber.  I  imagined  they  had  not  a  greater  man  to 
produce  on  the  other  side  than  Mr.  Pope  himself;  and  when  I 
joined  issue  with  him,  I  supposed  that  I  had  to  contend  against 
the  best  advocate  of  their  cause.  I  may  remark,  that  I  have 
not  stood  up  here  for  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope.  If  Liberius 
did  ^ign  the  confession  of  Sirmium,  which  Mr.  Pope  has  not 
proved,  it  was  on  being  freed  from  long  confinement,  and  from 
suffering.  Mr.  Pope  has  not  extricated  himself  from  the  dilemma 
in  which  I  involved  him,  as  to  the  power  of  an  ignorant  Protestant 
to  make  an  act  of  faith  upon  the  inspiration  of  the  scriptures. 
How  can  the  Protestant  free  himself  from  doubts  1  He  has  no 
means  of  solving  all  the  difficulties  connected  with  the  scriptures. 
He  must  remove  them  through  the  instrumentality  of  private 
judgment,  or  be  a  deist,  or  an  atheist.  When  I  produced  the 
authority  of  the  holy  Fathers  of  the  early  ages,  to  prove  that  the 
Bible  is  the  word  of  God,  I  did  not  contradict  my  principles ; 
but  Mr.  Pope  violates  his  principles,  when  he  adduces  authority 
to  satisfy  the  doubting  Protestant.  I  have  put  certain  queries 
to  Mr.  Pope,  and  I  cannot  prevail  upon  him  even  to  attempt  an 
answer  to  them.  Mr.  Pope  has  talked  of  the  Son  of  God  having 
left  the  perfect  scriptures  to  man.  I  have  to  complain,  that  Mr. 
Pope  puts  into  my  mouth  doctrines,  which  I  by  no  means  enter- 
tain. I  consider  that  the  scriptures,  as  far  as  they  go,  contain 
a  rule  and  system  of  perfect  morality.  The  scriptures  I  study 
and  revere  :  but  I  abhor  the  principle  which  would  convert  the 
scriptures  into  instruments  of  infidelity.  I  maintain,  that  we 
should  not  be  allowed  to  abuse  those  scriptures  which  Christ 
left  to  his  church.     Christ  did  not  leave  them  to  be  interpreted 

17* 


198  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

by  the  varying  and  capricious  judgment  of  each  individual,  but 
to  be  read  according  to  the  interpretation  of  his  church.  Every 
man  possesses  a  divine  right  to  read  the  scriptures  in  the  three 
languages  in  which  they  were  originally  written,  viz  ;  Hebrew, 
Greek,  and  Latin.  These  were  the  channels  through  which  the 
pure  scriptures  were  transmitted.  But  is  a  man  to  adopt  the 
translations  of  Luther,  of  Calvin,  and  of  other  heretical  reformers? 
Or  does  it  follow  that  the  same  divine  right  to  read  the  scriptures 
in  the  originals,  can  be  transferred  to  varying  and  variable  trans- 
lations ?  I  could  prove  that  OEcolampadius  corrupted  the  scrip- 
tures in  more  than  one  thousand  places.  Again,  if  Luther  and 
Calvan  were  justified  in  their  conduct,  the  same  principle  would 
justify  Alius,  Cerinthus,  Eutychius,  Manicheus,  Montanus,  the 
Mugirletonians,  &c,  &c.  The  same  principle  would  justify 
Mr.  Pope  in  reforming  the  church  of  England — taking  away 
twenty-one  out  of  her  thirty-nine  articles,  demolishing  her  spiritual 
authority,  abolishing  her  prelates  and  pastors  (whose  succession 
is  derived  from  the  church  which  Protestants  refuse  to  acknow- 
ledge) and,  in  fine,  a  similar  principle  would  justify  Mr.  Pope  in 
tearing  up  the  church  of  England  by  the  roots.  But  it  would 
be  an  endless  task,  to  endeavour  to  enumerate  the  sects  and 
divisions  to  which  that  principle  has  given,  and  must  continue 
to  give  origin.  These  endless  sects  were  well  described  by 
Bossuet,  in  his  History  of  the  Protestant  Variations.  He  says, 
"  The  raging  sea  is  not  furrowed  by  more  waves,  nor  does  the 
uncultivated  land  produce  more  thistles  and  thorns,  thac  the 
Reformation  has  produced  religions,  since  the  epoch  of  its 
introduction." 

If  the  principle,  that  every  man  has  a  right  to  reform  ^he 
church  be  once  proclaimed,  a  reformation  of  the  church  of 
England  will  necessarily  follow.  It  will  be  soon  discovered 
that  she  can  be  approximated  to  a  more  perfect  standard  of 
evangelical  perfection — I,  by  the  same  principle  may  commence 
reformer  of  the  church  of  England,  by  asserting  that  her  scrip- 
tures are  not  all  pure,  and  I  may  strike  off  several  books  from 
the  canonical  list,  and  would  I  not  have  as  clear  and  as  undoubted 
a  right  to  do  so,  as  Mr.  Pope  has  to  reject  what  he  calls  the 
Apocrypha.  In  fine,  if  one  man  rejected  one  part,  and  another 
another  part,  would  not  the  consequence  be,  that  the  ivhole  Bible 
would  become  guesiionable  at  last. 

Mr.  Pope  talks  of  some  loose  and  immoral  characi'ers,  mem- 
bers of  the  Roman  Catholic  church.  Have  I  not  forborne  to 
to  mention  a  quondam  Protestant  Bishop  of  Waterford,  and 
another  bishop  of  more  recent  notoriety. 

Suppose  I  proclaim  a  complete  reformation  of  the  church  of 
England,  what  right  would  Mr.  Pope  possess  to  cal!  me  to  a» 


THE    REFORMATION.  199 

account?  I  would  say,  that  her  rich,  and  gorgeous,  an  J  pam- 
pered hierarchy,  ill  accorded  with  the  doctrines  of  the  humble 
Redeemer — I  would  say,  that  in  this  country  particularly,  she 
took  every  thing  from  the  poor,  and  gave  them  nothing  in  return. 
Would  Mr.  Pope  call  me  to  order?  Every  man  according  to 
his  principles,  has  a  right  to  preach.  Here  is  Mr.  Pope  himself, 
almost  a  layman,  teaching  and  preaching  to  ecclesiastics. 

r  shall  now  give  you  Luther's  character  as  drawn  by  himself. 
He  sketches  his  own  portrait  in  better  and  truer  colours,  I  fancy, 
and  more  to  the  life,  than  if  he  had  sat  for  it  to  the  best  literary 
limner  in  existence.  I  have  here  the  German  text,  and  it  is 
from  the  translation  of  it,  I  shall  select  the  following  passages : 

"I,  Martin  Luther,  as  to  those  matters  (matters  of  faith)  am,  and  wish  ta 
be  deemed  obstinate,  contumacious,  and  violent  j  and  let  tliis  be  my  creed,  I 
yield  to  no  man." 

"  I  am  a  doctor  above  all  doctors,  and  an  unworthy  evangelist  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  I,  Martin  Luther,  by  the  grace  of  God,  evangehst  of  Wittem- 
bergh.  1,  Doctor  Martin  Luther,  am  your  Apostle,  I  am  a  prophet,  I  am 
Isaiah,  to  the  honour  of  God  and  to  the  confusion  of  the  devil.  A  second 
John  the  Baptist — a  great  hero — a  most  rare  man — such  as  has  not  existed 
for  many  ages — I  am  a  saint  of  God.     My  mouth  is  the  mouth  of  Christ 

— I  AM  NOT  FAR  FROM  THINKING  MYSELF  A  GoD  !  !" 

"  May  thunder  and  Ughtning — hell's  fire  and  brimstone,  plagues,  and  every 
dirty  and  filthy  evil  fall  upon  the  two  twins  of  the  devil,  the  Pope  and  his 
cardinals." 

He  calls  Henry  the  eighth  of  England, 

"A  fool" — "a  madman" — "a  lunatic" — a  monster  of  insanity" — "an 
ass" — "a  hog" — "  a  log" — "a  knave" — "a  devil" — "an  imp" — "a  robber." 

He  calls  Henry,  Duke  of  Brunswick, 

"A  buffoon" — "a  blackguard" — "an  idiot  ' — "a  lecher" — and  "an 
effeminate." 

He  sacrilegiously  added  the  word  "only"  to  the  text  of  St. 
Paul,  respecting  justification  by  faith ;  and  when  upbraided  with 
the  corruption,  he  replied, 

"  If  any  papist  shall  start  up  against  this  word  only,  immediately  oppose  to 
him  the  will  of  Dr.  Martin  Luther,  who  asserts  that  the  Pope  and  an  ass  are 
one  and  the  same  thing,  (quid  unum  et  idem)  and  who  is  a  doctor  above  all 
Popes  and  doctors." 

Again,  he  says, 

"In  studying  the  scriptures,  follow  this  rule — if  you  perceive  any  command 
in  the  scriptures  about  performing  good  works,  understand  such  command 
to  be  a  prohibition  against  the  performance  of  good  works,  for  this  reason,  that 
every  man  is  incapable  of  doing  a  good  work." 

Again,  of  these  words  of  Christ  to  his  Apostles — "  Ye  are  the 
light  of  the  world."  Luther  makes  the  following  version^ — vos 
estis  stircus  in  laterna — "Ye  are  filth  in  a  lantern."     Again, 

"Christ,  in  the  hearts  of  papists,  is  nothing  but  a  mere  fiction — a  pagan 
idol.  He  who  believes  in  Christ,  will  be  damned  according,  to  papists.  If 
Christ  be  truly  Christ,  then  monks  and  nuns  cannot  be  Christians." 


200.  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

"In  two  years'  time,  my  gospel  will  be  so  diffused,  tha  the  Pope,  and  hw 
bishops,  and  priests,  and  monks,  and  nuns,  and  bells,  and  towers,  and  cells, 
and  the  mass,  will  be  no  more  heard  of;  in  short,  there  \yill  be  an  end  of 
Popery  altogether." 

"A  pious  man  sinneth  in  every  good  work.    A  good  work,  no  matter 

HOW    WELL    PERFORMED,   IS,    NEVERTHELESS,    A    DKADLY    SIN.       He   who   be- 

lieveth,  can  neither  be  a  sinner,  nor  an  adulterer.  I  find  nothing  pure  or  holy 
either  in  myself,  or  in  all  mankind,  and  all  our  good  works  are  hke  lice  on 
an  old  skin.'* 

To  his  wife  Catherine,  whom  he  seduced  from  her  three  vows 
of  poverty,  chastity,  and  obedience,  he  says, 

"  Ats  it  is  not  in  my  power,  who  am  a  man,  to  become  a  woman,  nor  in 
your  power,  who  art  a  woman,  to  become  a  man ;  so  neither  is  it  in  my 
power  to  do  without  a  woman,  nor  in  your's  to  do  without  a  man." 

As  to  his  contradictory  doctrines,  the  following  are  a  few,  out 
of  many  hundred  specimens  : 

"  I  believe  in  purgatory,  and  I  know  it  to  be  true  that  souls  are  tortured 
there,  and  may  be  relieved  by  prayers,  fasting,  and  alms." 

And  in  another  place,  he  says, 

"  I  confidently  assert  that  purgatory,  with  all  its  ceremonies  and  mimio 
worship,  is  a  diabolical  crime,  as  being  diametrically  opposed  to  that  cardinal 
a!  tide,  that  the  salvation  of  souls  rests  upon  the  merits  of  Christ,  and  nol 
of  men." 

Again,  he  says, 

"Whoever  preaches  against  the  doctrine  of  pontifical  indulgences,  let  him 
be  accursed."     And — 

"  The  indulgences  which  are  practised  in  the  Roman  church  are  execrable 
frauds." 

"Above  all  things  it  is  necessary,  and  the  scripture  itself  plainly  teaches, 
that  God  wishes  all  voivs  to  be  fulfilled."     Again — 

"I  wish  I  could  persuade  all  mankind  that  all  vows  of  whatsoever  descrip- 
tion, should  be  despised,  and  that  every  person  should  enjoy  the  liberty  of 
the  gospel." 

"Let  us  abstain  from  all  sins,  but  in  particular  from  all  good  tvorks,  for  all 
the  good  works  we  perform  are  dead." 

"It  is  impossible  for  us  to  resist  the  slighest  temptation  to  sin,  and  the  scrip- 
tare  itself  teaches  that  we  are  slaves  of  the  devil,  and  as  it  were  the  subjects 
of  God  our  prince." 

".^  vow  of  chastity  is  worse  than  adultery  and  impvrity." 

"  It  is  not  so  much  my  desire  to  demonstrate  how  chastity  is  to  be  observed, 
but  that  it  is  impossible,  and  ought  not  to  be  observed." 

"  If  any  one  shall  correct  you  for  speaking  smuttily,  let  this  be  your  reply 
— What  then?     If  the  whole  world  be  oflfended,  we  must  obey  necessity." 

"If  Huss  was  a  heretic,  I  will  be  ten  times  a  greater  one." 

"I  am  often  in  doubt  whether  I  teach  the  truth  or  not," 

"This  thing  (the  Reformation)  neither  commenced  on  God's  account,  rci 
will  it  end  on  God's  account. 

He  had  also  the  sacrilegious  audacity  to  corrupt  the  Apostles 
creed,  where,  instead  of  "  I  believe  the  Catholic  church,"  he 
substitutes,  "  I  believe  the  Christian  church,"  well  judging  tha? 
he  had  no  cl&im  to  Catholicity. 


THE    REFORMATION.  201 

He  also  confesses,  that  he  eat  a  bushel  of  salt  with  the  devil 
— that  he  slept  oftener  with  him  than  with  his  wife  Catherine — • 
thit  when  he  had  not  the  devil  appended  about  his  neck,  he  was 
a  mere  dry  theologian. — Vide  Le  Roy  Labyrintho,  cap.  13,  et 
ipsum  Lutherum,  de  Missa  Angulari,  Colloquia  mensalia,  et 
Tomun— 7  vol.  228. 

If  the  foregoing  extracts  from  Luther's  works  be  genuine,  and 
I  challenge  inquiry  on  the  subject,  T  put  this  single  question — 
Mould  the  Almighty  and  all- wise  God  employ  such  an  instrument 
to  reform  his  church? 

Again  in  his  book  De  Missa  Prii  ata,  (von  der  Winckelmesz,) 
he  acknowledges  and  describes  at  large  his  famous  conference 
with  the  devil,  in  which  he  confesses  to  have  been  prevailed 
upon  by  his  satanic  majesty  to  abrogate  private  masses — the 
arguments  employed  by  the  devil  were  five  in  number.  The 
work  in  which  this  conference  is  to  be  found,  was  written  in 
German  by  Luther's  own  hand,  and  translated  into  Latin  at 
Luther's  own  request,  by  Justus  Jonas.  See  also  Tanner  in 
his  Anatomy  of  Luther. 

Such,  Gentlemen,  were  the  doctrines  of  this  arch-reformer, 
and  Protestant  Apostle,  derived,  if  we  can  believe  himself,  from 
the  devil,  the  father  of  lies.  My  learned  friend  sometimes  differs 
from  Luther — Luther  from  my  learned  friend — which  of  them 
will  you  follow  ? 

Luther  thus,  thrasonically,  expresses  himself  elsew*iere — 

^•Here  I  stand — here  I  sit — here!  remain — here  I  boast— here  I  triumph- 
here  I  insult  the  papists,  the  Thomists,  the  Henrycists,  the  Sophists,  and  all 
the  gates  of  hell — yea,  and  all  the  words  of  men,  no  matter  how  sanctified. 
The  divine  Majesty  has  enabled  me  to  set  at  nought  a  thousand  Augustin's, 
a  thousand  Cyprians,  though  they  should  stand  up  against  me." 

The  two  following  brief  quotations  from  Luther  I  dare  not 
translate  : 

"Clui  Diabolum  novit  Confidenter  ei  dicit,  Zamic,  mihi  nates; — crepitus 
ventris  longius  fugat  Diabolum  quam  sacra  scriptural !" 

The  above  are  to  be  seen  by  any  inquirer  in  the  original 
German. 

Dr.  Heylin,  a  most  learned  Protestant  historian,  gives  the 
following  account  of  the  introduction  of  the  new  Luther-dn  doc- 
trines into  Dantzick  (in  his  Cosmogony,  p.  148  :) 

"  Dantzick  was  the  first  town  in  the  kingdom  of  Poland  which  gave  en- 
trance to  the  doctrines  of  Luther,  Anno  1525,  but  in  so  tumultuous  a  manner, 
that  they  who  favoured  his  opinions,  deposed  the  old  common-council  men, 
and  created  new  ones  of  their  own — prophaned  the  Churches,  robbed  them  of 
their  ornaments,  and  shamefully  abused  the  priests  and  religious  persons — 
abolished  the  mass — and  altered  all  things  at  their  pleasure.  But  by  the 
commg  of  the  King,  they  grcTV  somewhat  quieter,  leaving  the  convent  of 
Rlack  Friars  to  two  nuns,  who  still  enjoy  the  exercise  of  their  religion." 


202  THE    JUSTIFICATION    OF 

The  same  writer  says,  (Ibidem,  Book  II,  page  36.) 
"Whilst  the  Lutherans  were  thus  playing  their  game,  there  started  up 
Another  party,  begun  at  first  by  Zuinglius,  amongst  the  Switzers.  These, 
not  communicating  councils,  went  two  different  ways,  especially  in  the  pointa 
of  consubstantiation  and  the  real  presence.  Not  reconciled  in  their  times, 
nor  like  to  be  agreed  upon  by  their  followers.  For  Calvin,  rising  into  the 
esteem  and  place  of  Zuinglius,  added  some  texts  of  his  own  to  the  former 
doctrines,  touching  predestination,  free-will,  &c,  by  which  the  differences 
were  widened,  and  the  breach  made  irreparable:  this  course  being  followed 
on  each  side  with  great  impatience,  as  if  they  did  not  strive  so  much  for  truth 
as  victory.^^ 

Again,  the  same  writer  says,  (page  136.) 

"In  the  year  1528,  religion  being  altered,  in  a  tumult  of  the  people  in  the 
Canton  of  Berne,  near  adjoining  to  Geneva,  Viret  and  Farrellus,  two  Zuing- 
lian  preachers,  did  endeavour  it  in  Geneva  also.  But  finding  that  the  bishop 
and  clergy  did  not  like  their  doings,  they  screwed  themselves  into  the  people, 
and  by  their  aid,  in  a  popular  tumult,  compelled  the  bishop  and  his  clergy  to 
abandon  the  town.  Nor  did  they  only  in  that  tumult  alter  the  doctrine  and 
orders  of  the  church  before  established,  but  changed  the  government  of  the 
state  also,  disclaiming  all  allegiance  both  to  duke  and  bishop,  and  standing 
on  their  oxon  liberty  as  a  free  commonwealth.  And  though  all  this  was  done 
by  Viret  and  Farrellus,  before  Calvin's  coming  to  that  city,  which  was  not 
till  1536,  yet,  being  come,  no  man  %o as  forwarder  than  he  to  approve  the 
action.  And  that  rather  than  their  discipline  should  not  be  admitted,  and  the 
episcopal  government  destroyed  in  all  the  churches  of  Christ,  they  were 
resolved  to  depose  kings,  ruin  kingdoms,  and  to  subvert  the  fundamental  con- 
stitution of  all  cicil  states." 

It  cannot  be  inappropriate  to  give  a  short  account  of  these 
principal  reformers.  Luther  was  taken  suddenly  ill  after  eating 
a  hearty  supper,  and  died  in  the  night.  Zuinglius  was  killed  in 
a  rebellion  excited  by  himself  and  his  party,  against  the  Catholic 
cantons,  anno  1531.  (Ecolampadius  was  found  dead  in  his  bed, 
before  Luther  met  his  fate  ;  the  latter  did  not  hesitate  to  declare, 
that  he  was  strangled  by  the  devil. — (Lib.  de  Miss.  Priv.  et 
Unit.  Sacr.  Tome  vii,  p.  250.)  Calvin,  in  the  year  1564,  died 
of  a  dreadful  complication  of  distempers,  which  Catholics  and 
some  Protestants  assure  us  he  bore  so  ill,  that  he  expired  in 
despair,  blaspheming  God,  and  invoking  the  devils.  See  Bol- 
seck,  in  his  book  of  Calvin's  Life. — Schlusselburgh,  a  learned 
Lutheran,  in  Theol.  Calviniana,  printed  anno  1594,  p.  72. — 
Herenius,  a  Calvinistic  preacher,  declares,  that  he  was  an  eye 
witness  of  Calvin's  tragical  end,  and  that  he  died  in  despair,  of  a 
most  filthy  and  stinking  disease. — See  his  Liber,  de  vita  Calvini. 

The  following  testimony  is  given  by  Melancthon  to  the  char- 
Ttcter  of  the  reformers.  It  is  taken  from  his  Commentary  on 
St.  Matt.  6th  ch. 

"  It  is  plain,  that  in  these  countries  (he  speaks  of  the  countries  which  em- 
braced Luther's  reformation)  men's  whole  concern  is  almost  about  banquet- 
ting,  drunkenness,  and  carousing.  And  so  strangely  barbarous  is  the  people, 
that  most  men  are  persuaded  that  if  they  do  but  fast  one  day,  they  must  die 
the  following  night." 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    203 

So  you  perceive,  gentlemen,  fasting  was  not  then  exploded. 
I  may  remark,  in  reference  to  some  arguments  of  Mr.  Pope  on 
the  subject,  that  the  Albigenses  and  Waldenses  retained  to  the 
last  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass.  They,  therefore,  cannot  be 
legitimately  numbered  amongst  the  reformers.  I  could  quote 
many  foul  and  scandalous  passages  from  the  works  of  Calvin, 
and  other  reformers,  in  proof  of  the  happy  improvement  in 
morals  and  religion,  which  they  introduced  by  throwing  off  the 
yoke  of  what  they  called  a  superstition,  and  giving  full  scope  to 
the  licentious  and  desolating  principles  of  the  Reformation. 

Jacobus  Andreas  (in  Luke  21)  says, 

"  The  other  part  of  the  Germans,  viz ;  the  Protestants,  give  due  place  to 
the  preaching  of  the  word  of  God ;  but  no  amendment  of  manners  is  found 
among  them  ;  on  the  contrary,  we  see  them  lead  an  abominable  voluptuous 
beastly  life ;  instead  of  fasts,  they  spend  whole  nights  and  days  in  revelry  and 
drunkenness." 

Cranmer  was  a  good  example  of  the  celibacy  of  the  reformers — 
he  brought  his  wife  over  with  him  in  a  chest  to  England,  but 
through  a  mistake  in  the  landing  it,  the  sailors  turned  up  the 
wrong  end  of  the  chest ;  the  consequence  was,  that  its  fair 
inmate  was  forced  to  cry  out  for  relief,  and  the  hypocrital  hus- 
band was  obliged  to  expose  her  to  the  public  view.  I  have  many 
other  quotations  here  ;  as  to  the  character  of  the  modern  reform- 
ers, but  I  find  I  have  not  time  at  present  to  read  them  to  you. 


Fifth  Day — Tuesday,  April  24. 


SUBJECT. — "  The  doctrine  of  Transuhstantiatton.'' 
Admiral  Oliver  and  John  Dillon,  Esq.,  in  the  Chair. 

Mr.  Pope. — I  beg  to  call  upon  Mr.  Maguire  for  proofs  of  the 
doctrine  of  Transubstantiation. 

Mr.  Maguire. — Gentlemen,  as  it  was  agreed  upon  yester- 
day, not  to  recur  to  the  question  of  the  Reformation,  I  shall  at 
once  proceed  to  the  very  important  subject  of  this  day's  discus- 
sion— namely,  Transubstantiation.  It  is  a  question  of  the  most 
solemn  complexion,  and  I  trust  that  although  my  friend  Mr. 
Pope  will  be  obliged,  by  his  established  principles  to  difier  from 
me  on  this  occasion,  that  he  will  indulge  in  no  useless  and  pro- 
PHANE  sarcasms  against  a  doctrine  which  I  shall  prove  to  havp 
been  openly  established  for  eighteen  hundred  years.  I  sincerely 
trust,  that  in  the  course  of  this  day's  discussion,  my  friend  will 


204         THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTAN  TIATION. 

not  make  use  of  any  expression,  which  would  be,  according  to 
my  principles,  an  absolute  blasphemy  against  the  Son  of  God. 
If  the  doctrine  which  I  undertake  to  defend  be  that  which  was 
vreached  by  the  Apostles  and  received  by  them  from  Christ,  then 
it  would  be  manifest  blasphemy  to  utter  any  sarcasm  against 
this  great  and  fundamental  tenet.  Before  1  enter  upon  my  direct 
proofs,  I  shall  beg  leave  to  draw  your  attention  to  one  important 
fact.  We  are  told  that  Melchisedech,  a  priest  of  the  Most  High, 
"  made  an  offering  of  bread  and  wine  ;"  and  St.  Paul  assures 
us  that  Christ  "  was  a  high  priest  for  ever  according  to  the  ordtr 
of  JMelchesidech,^^  Now,  if  the.  same  offering  or  sacrifice  be 
not  continued  till  the  consummation  of  ages,  Christ  could  not 
be  a  priest ybr  ever  according  to  the  order  of  Melchesidech.  I 
could  prepare  your  minds  with  further  prefatory  observations, 
but  the  dogma  which  I  maintain  is  so  clear  and  so  sustainable, 
that  I  proceed  at  once  to  my  direct  arguments. 

First,  then,  I  refer  you  to  the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  John,  where 
our  Saviour  draws  a  comparison  between  the  bread  which  he 
promised  to  bequeath  for  the  life  of  the  world  and  the  manna 
which  came  down  from  heaven  to  feed  the  distressed  Israelites. 

"The  bread  (said  he)  that  I  will  give  you,  is  niy  flesh  for  the  life  of  the 
world.  Your  Fathers  did  eat  manna  in  the  desert,  and  are  dead ;  if  any 
man  eat  of  this  bread,  he  shall  live  for  ever." 

Our  Redeemer  here  extols  what  he  was  about  to  give  at  his 
last  supper,  far  beyond  the  bread  which  we  know  descended 
from  heaven.  Now,  in  my  mind,  the  latter  would  have  been 
far  superior  to  the  former,  if  our  Saviour  had  left  us  nothing  but 
a  bit  of  bread  and  a  drop  of  wine.  Many  of  those  who  were 
present,  and  some  of  them  his  disciples,  were  shocked  at  the 
expression,  and  they  asked  how  was  it  possible  that  he  could 
give  them  his  flesh  to  eat  ?  What  was  the  conduct  then  of  our 
Lord  who  came  to  instruct  all  unto  salvation,  and  who  neither 
could  deceive  nor  be  deceived  1  Instead  of  representing  to  them 
their  mistake  or  correcting  their  error,  if  it  were  one,  he  says, 

"  Amen,  Amen,  I  say  unto  you  ;  unless  you  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of 
Man,  and  drink  his  blood,  you  shall  not  have  life  in  you." 

At  this,  many  of  his  disciples  who  followed  him  through  all 
dangers  and  persecutions,  all  those  who  were  about  him  from 
Capernaum,  ivent  back,  and  walked  no  longer  with  him.  Would 
he,  the  benign  and  beneficent  Jesus,  who  had  descended  upon 
earth  to  lead  man  from  sin,  and  who  was  about  to  offer  himselt 
upon  the  cross  for  man's  redemption,  would  he  suffer  those  per- 
sons to  depart,  believing  that  he  spoke  of  a  reality,  and  not 
explain  to  them  their  error,  if  indeed,  it  were  an  error  1  Would 
he  have  suffered  them  to  fall  innocently  into  error,  when  he  could 
have   so  easily  corrected  their  misapprehension?     I  ask  any 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TR  VNS  CJBSTANTIATION.  205 

reasonable  man,  had  not  the  people  of  Capernaum,  in  whose 
vernacular  language  (the  Syriac)  our  Lord  then  spoke,  a  better 
opportunity  of  knowing  the  meaning  of  the  words  of  our  Saviour 
on  this  occasion,  than  we  who  live  at  the  distance  of  eighteen 
hundred  years,  whose  habits  and  language  are  confessedly  dif- 
ferent ?  When  our  Lord  declared,  "  the  bread  that  I  will  give  is 
my  flesh  for  the  life  of  the  world,"  they  then  understood  Jesus 
to  speak  of  real  flesh  and  real  blood;  and  accordingly  they  walked 
no  longer  with  him.  He  did  not  correct  their  error,  if  such  it 
were.  What  more  easy  for  him  than  to  say,  (if  that  were  his 
meaning)  that  he  did  not  intend  to  give  them  his  real  flesh  and 
blcx)d — that  he  only  spoke  in  a  figurative  sense?  But  Jesus 
made  no  such  correction.  If  it  were  not  his  real  body  and 
blood  of  which  Christ  then  spoke,  he  led  those  people  into  error: 
but  that  supposition  is  manifest  blasphemy.  Hence  I  conclude, 
that  the  Jews  were  right  when  they  understood  him  to  speak  of 
his  real  body  and  real  blood.  It  may  be  said  that  the  error  of  his 
disciples,  and  of  the  people  of  Capernaum,  was  one  which  Christ 
was  not  obliged  to  correct.  But,  as  St.  Augustin  remarks, 
though  the  Jews  in  a  gross  and  carnal  manner  understood  him 
to  mean  that  he  would  give  his  flesh  to  them  like  meat  taken 
^rom  a  hutcher^s  stall,  yet  they  understood  him  to  speak  of  a 
reality  ;  and  if  he  did  not  mean  to  give  them  his  flesh  really,  the 
error  could  have  been  easily  corrected.  But  Christ  was  not 
called  upon  to  tell  them  how  it  would  be  really  given — that  being 
a  secret  not  to  be  communicated  till  the  period  of  redemption 
was  arrived.  That,  indeed,  would  be  exposing  the  mysteries  of 
heaven  before  the  time.  This  argument  appears  to  me  to  be 
insuperable.  I  will  be  told,  in  the  language  of  Christ :  "  It  is 
the  spirit  that  quickeneth;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing."  I  will 
show  greater  authority  for  my  interpretation  of  those  words  than 
they  can,  who  endeavour  to  explain  away  the  words  of  our 
Saviour.  I  can  produce  the  passages  in  the  holy  Fathers,  in 
which  they  quote  those  identical  words  in  order  to  show  their 
meaning.  We,  who  admit  the  real  presence,  hold,  that  those 
who  receive  Christ  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar,  if  they  do  not 
receive  the  sacrament  worthily  and  with  the  proper  dispositions, 
do  not  receive  with  it  the  spirit  of  God — that  though  they  receive 
the  substance  of  the  sacrament,  the  flesh  doth  not  profit  them. 
Hear  what  St.  Paul  says, 

"He  that  eateth  and  drink eth  unworthily,  eateth  and  drinketh  judgment 
to  himself,  not  discerning  the  body  of  the  Lord." 

But  it  is  behind  the  sacred  words  of  eternal  truth,  fulfilled  and 
verified  by  Christ  at  the  last  supper,  that  I  take  my  stand.  Upon 
them  I  erect  irrefragable  proofs. — What  Christ  promised  in  the 
sixth  chanter  of  St.  John,  he  fulfilled  at  his  last  supper.     When 

IS 


206  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

solemnly  seated  at  the  board  with  his  chosen  twelve,  he  took 
bread,  blessed  it,  broke  it,  and  gave  it  to  them  saying,  "  Take 
ye  and  eat,  this  is  my  body.-' — And  presenting  them  with  the 
chalice,  he  said,  "  Drink  ye  all  of  this,  for  this  is  my  blood  of 
the  New  Testament,  which  shall  be  shed  for  many  for  the 
remission  of  sins."  What  Christ  then  promised  in  the  sixth  of 
John,  he  here  fulfilled  to  the  letter,  and  must  we  not  take  his 
words  in  their  natural  and  obvious  sense  ?  Shall  we  resort  to 
tropes,  and  figures,  and  metaphors,  in  order  to  explain  away  the 
word  of  the  Lord  ?  If  Mr.  Pope  exercises  his  private  judg 
ment  on  the  passage,  and  pertinaciously  adheres  to  his  inter- 
pretation of  the  words,  it  is  impossible  we  could  agree  upon  the 
matter.  I  adhere  firmly  and  steadily  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
church.  Look  to  the  primitive  ages  of  Christianity — examine 
the  successors  of  the  Apostles,  who  believed  and  taught  what 
was  believed  and  taught  by  the  Apostles  themselves,  and  who 
transmitted  the  doctrines  to  their  successors.  They  are  all  in 
support  of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  I  shall  first  quote 
the  passage  from  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  in  his  Mystagog.  Cat. 
4,  where  taking  as  his  text  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  "  For  I  re- 
<:eived  of  the  Lord  that  which  I  also  have  delivered  unto  you," 
speaks  thus  of  the  real  presence  and  of  transubstantiation. 

"This  doctrine  of  the  blessed  Paul  may  be  sufficient  to  satisfy  you  con- 
cerning the  divine  mysteries  which  you  have  received,  that  you  have  been 
made  partakers  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  for  he  now  says,  that  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  the  same  night  in  which  he  was  betrayed,  took  bread, 
and  gave  it  to  his  disciples,  saying,  *Take,  eat;  this  is  my  body.'  And 
taking  the  chalice,  and  giving  thanks,  said,  *Take,  drink  ;  this  is  my  blood.' 
Since  Christ  himself,  then,  did  so  affirm,  and  say  of  the  bread,  *This  is  my 
body,'  who  shall  from  thenceforth  presume  to  make  any  doubt  of  it  ?  And  since 
he  affirms  and  says,  *This  is  my  blood,*  who,  I  say,  shall  doubt,  and  say  it  is 
not  his  blood?  He  once  changed  water  into  wine  (which  has  some  likeness 
to  blood)  in  Cana  of  Galilee,  by  his  own  power;  and  shall  he  not  be  thought 
worthy  of  belief  in  changing  wine  into  blood  ?  Being  invited  to  an  earthly 
marriage,  he  wrought  this  stupendous  miraclej  and  shall  we  not  much  rather 
confess,  that  he  gave  his  own  body  and  blood  to  the  children  of  the  bridegioom  ? 
Therefore,  with  full  assurance  let  us  receive  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 
For  under  the  type  (or  appearance)  of  bread  the  body  is  given  unto  thee,  and 
under  the  type  of  wine  the  blooa ;  that  receiving  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  thou  mayest  be  co-partner  with  him  of  his  body  and  blood;  so  -sliall  we 
be  Christephori,  carriers  of  Christ,  when  we  receive  his  body  and  blood  into 
our  members  ;  and  by  this  means  (as  St.  Peter  saith)  be  made  partakers  of 
the  divine  nature.  Do  not  consider  them  as  naked  bread  and  naked  inine,  for 
it  is  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  according  to  the  M'ords  of  our  Lord  himself. 
For  though  your  senses  should  suggest  this  to  you,  yet  let  faith  confirm  you.— 
Judge  not  of  the  thing  by  the  taste,  but  rather  be  more  certainly  assured  by 
faith,  so  as  to  leave  no  room  for  a  doubt  but  that  the  body  and  blood  are 
given  to  thee.  This  knowing,  and  of  this  being  assured,  that  what  appears 
W)  you  bread  is  not  bread,  but  the  body  of  Christ,  although  the  taste  judges  it 
to  be  bread;  and  that  the  wine  which  you  see,  and  which  has  the  taste  ofwine^ 
i$  not  wine,  but  the  blood  of  Christ — '  Taste  and  see  how  sweet  the  Lord  m.* 
Think  you,  now,  that  you  arp  requirc('  to  discern  t'lis  by  the  sense  of  taste  | 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    201 

No,  by  no  means,  but  by  the  testimony  of  faith,  which  is  certain,  and  leaves 
no  doubt. — For  when  you  take  them,  you  are  not  commanded  to  take  bread 
and  wine,  but  under  the  appearance  of  these,  to  take  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ." 

St.  Chrysostom,  in  his  83d  Homily  on  the  26th  chapter  of 
Matthew,  tome  7,  maintains  the  same  doctrine. 

"Let  us,  (says  he)  believe  God  in  every  thing,  and  not  gainsay  him^  ahhough 
what  is  said  may  seem  contrary  to  our  reason  and  our  sight.  Let  his  word 
overpower  both.  Thus  let  us  do  in  mysteries^  not  looking  only  on  the  things 
that  lie  before  us,  but  holding  fast  his  words  ;  for  his  word  cannot  deceive, 
but  our  sense  is  very  easily  deceived.  That  never  faileth — this  often.  Since, 
then,  his  word  says,  *  This  is  my  bodyy*  let  us  assent  and  believe  and  view  it 
with  the  eyes  of  our  understanding.  Christ  left  to  us  nothing  sensible,  but 
\hings  intellectual^  under  sensible  forms.  Thus  the  blessing  of  baptism  is 
given  by  water,  which  is  corporeal ;  but  what  is  done  by  it — namely,  regen- 
eration and  renovation,  is  incorporeal  or  intellectual.  If  you  were  incorporeal, 
lie  would  have  bequeathed  to  you  gifts  purely  incorporeal  ;  but  as  your  soul 
is  united  to  a  body,  those  gifts  are  to  be  comprehended  under  corporeal  signs. 
How  many  persons  are  heard  to  say,  I  would  willingly  behold  his  figure,  his 
shape,  his  attire  !  But  thou  seest  him — thou  touchest  him — thou  receivest  him 
into  thy  breast  ;  yet  thou  desirest  to  see  his  garments.  He  gives  himself  to 
Ihec,  not  to  be  looked  upon  only,  but  to  be  touched,  to  be  eaten,  to  be  admit- 
ted into  thy  breast.  These  are  not  the  works  of  human  power.  He  who  in 
that  supper  made  these  things  himself,  now  also  does  them  for  you.  We  hold 
the  order  of  ministers,  but  the  sanctijier  and  changer  of  them  is  Himself;  who 
will  give  us  of  his  flesh  that  ive  may  be  filled. — (Job,  xxxi,  31.)  This  Christ 
has  done — not  only  allowing  himself  to  be  seen,  but  to  be  touched  too,  and 
to  be  eaten,  and  teeth  to  pierce  his  flesh,  and  all  to  be  filled  with  the  love  of 
him.  Parents  often  give  their  children  to  be  nourished  by  others ;  not  so  I, 
says  Christ ;  but  I  nourish  you  with  my  flesh,  and  I  place  myself  before  you. 
I  was  willing  to  become  your  brother ;  for  the  sake  of  you  I  took  flesh  and 
blood,  and  again  I  delivered  to  you  that  flesh  and  blood  by  which  I  became 
Bo  related."— (Hom.  24,  in  Joan,  i,  5,  p.  292.) 

"  What  sayest  thou,  O  blessed  Paul  ?  Wilhng  to  impress  on  the  hearer, 
and  making  mention  of  the  tremenduous  mysteries,  thou  callest  them  the  cup 
of  benediction." — ( 1st  Corinth,  x,  16.) 

"  That  terrible  and  tremendous  cup^— that  which  is  in  the  cup  is  that  lohich 
Howedfrom  his  side,  and  we  partake  of  it.  It  is  not  of  the  altar,  but  of  Christ 
himself  we  partake  ;  let  us  therefore  approach  to  him  with  all  reverence  and 
purity ;  and  when  thou  beholdest  the  body  lying  before  thee  say  to  thyself,  by 
this  body  I  am  no  longer  earth  and  ashes.  This  is  that  very  body  lohich  bled, 
which  was  pierced  by  the  lance,'''' — (Hom.  24,  in  Ep.  ad  Cor.  i,  10.) 

"  He  that  was  present  at  the  last  supper,  is  the  same  who  is  now  present, 
and  consecrates  our  feast :  for  it  is  not  man  who  makes  the  things  lying  on  the 
altar  become  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  but  that  Christ  who  teas 
crucified  for  us.  The  loords  are  pronounced  by  the  priest,  but  it  is  the  power 
and  grace  of  God  that  consecrates  them.  He  said,  *  this  is  my  body,'  thfse 
loords  make  the  change.'''' — Hom.  De  Frodit.  Judaj.  t.  v.  page  415.) 

"  As  many  partake  of  this  body,  as  many  taste  of  this  blood,  thint  it 
nothing  different  from  that  which  sits  above,  and  is  adored  by  angels." — 
(Hom.  3,  ad  Ephs.  Tome  10.) 

"  This  fa6/e  supplies  the  place  of  the  manger  ;  for  even  here  shall  lie  ih© 
body  of  our  Lord,  not  wrapped  in  swaddling  clothes,  as  then,  but  surrounded 
on  all  sides  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  that  are  initiated  understand  these 
things.  The  magi,  or  wise  men  did  nothing  but  adore  ;  but  thou,  if  thou 
comest  with  a  pure  conscience,  wilt  be  permitted  to  take  him  to  thyself.'' 
(Orat  De  S.  Philogonio  t.  ii,  p.  337.) 


208  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

"  The  servants  of  Job,  to  show  their  love  for  him,  said,  *  who  will  give  ua 
of  his  flesh  that  we  may  be  filled.' — (xxxi,  31.)  In  like  manner  Christ  gave 
us  hisjiesh  that  with  it,  we  may  be  filled  and  inflamed  with  the  love  of  hiniu 
This  body  lying  in  the  manger,  the  wise  men  reverenced,  seeing  no  such  thing 
aa  thou  seest ;  thou  dost  no  see  him  in  the  manger,  but  on  the  altar — nor  dost 
thou  only  see  him,  but  moreover  thou  touchest  him — thou  eatest  him,  and 
retumest  home  with  him  in  thy  breast ;  cleanse  then,  thy  soul  from  all  defile- 
ment, and  prepare  thyself  to  receive  these  mystenes." — (Hom.  24,  In  1, 
Cor.  i,  10.) 

"  Wonderful !  !  The  table  is  spread  with  mysteries,  the  Lamb  of  God  ia 
slain  for  thee,  and  the  spiritual  blood  flows  from  the  sacred  table.  Tho 
spiritual  fire  comes  down  from  heaven  ;  the  blood  in  the  chalice  is  drawn  from 
the  spotless  side,  for  thy  purification.  Thinkestthou  that  thou  seest  bread  ?-- 
that  thou  seest  wine  ? — that  these  things  pass  off'  as  other  foods  do  ? — far  be 
it  from  thee  to  think  so.  But  as  wax,  brought  near  to  the  fire,  loses  its  for- 
mer substance,  which  no  longer  remains  ;  so  do  thou  thus  conclude  that  the 
mysteries  (the  bread  and  wine,)  are  consumed  by  the  substance  of  the  body; 
wherefore  approaching  to  them,  think  not  that  you  receive  divine  body  from  a 
mrn,  but  fire  from  the  hand  of  a  seraphim." — Hom.  De  Panitione  sue  de 
Euchar.  in  Encoeniu.  t.  v,  page  489. 

"  Christ  was  not  content  to  be  made  a  man — to  be  scourged — but  reduced 
us,  as  I  may  say,  into  one  mass  or  lump  with  himself,  and*  this  not  only  by 
faith,  but  in  very  deed,  maketh  us  his  own  body.  What  ought  then  to  be 
purer  than  he  who  shall  partake  of  the  sacrifice.  What  rays  of  the  sun  ought 
not  those  hands  to  exceed  in  brightness  which  handle  this  crown — that  mouth 
which  is  filled  with  spiritual  fire — that  tongue  which  is  bloody  with  this  admi- 
rable blood!  Call  to  mind  with  what  honour  thou  art  dignified,  of  what  table 
thou  partakest.  For  we  are  fed  icith  that  thing  which,  when  the  angels  behold^ 
they  tremble.  Neither  can  they  without  fear  see,  by  reason  of  the  glory  which 
Cometh  from  thence;  and  we  are  reduced  into  one  mass  with  him,  Christ's 
body  being  one  and  his  flesh  one  ;  who  shall  declare  the  power  of  the  Lord- — 
who  shall  make  known  his  praises  ?  What  shepherd  ever  fed  his  sheep  with 
his  own  members  ?  Many  mothers,  when  they  bring  forth  their  children, 
give  them  to  other  nurses,  this  Christ  would  not  do,  but  feeds  us  with  hisoi*jn 
proper  body,  and  joins,  and,  as  it  were,  glues  us  to  himself" 

The  following  passage  is  taken  from  St.  Augustin,  in  his 
Enarration  upon  the  33d  Psalm,  commenting  upon  these  words 
of  the  Septuagint  : — "  Ferebatur  in  manibus  suis,"  he  says  as 
plain  as  words  can  make  it,  that  though  David  could  not  carry 
himself  in  his  own  hands,  according  to  the  letter^  yet  the  prophecy 
was  accomplished  literally  in  ihe  person  of  Christ."  The  holy 
Father  observes — 

"  *  Ferebatur  in  manibus  suis.' — Hoc  vero  fratres  quomodo  possit  fieri  in 
homine  ?  Cluis  intelligat  ?  Quis  enim  portatur  in  manibus  suis  ?  Manibus 
aliorum  potest  portari  homo — manibus  suis  nemo  portatur.  Gluomodo  intelli- 
gatur  in  ipso  Da  vide  secundum  literam  noninvsnimus,  in  Christoauteminrcni- 
m.us.  Ferebatur  enim  Christus  in  manibus  suis  quando  commendans  ipsum 
Corpus  suum,  ait,  hoc  est  Corpus  meum — ferebat  enim  illud  Corpus  in  mani- 
bus suis.  *  He  was  borne  in  his  own  hands.'  *  How  this  could  be  done  by 
man,  brethren,  who  can  comprehend  ?  For  what  man  is  carried  in  his  own 
hands?  Man  can  be  carried  in  the  hands  of  others — in  his  own  hands  no 
man  is  carried.  How  this  can  be  understood  of  David  to  the  letter  we  do 
not  find,  but  in  the  person  of  Cj;irist  we  find  it  lite^'ally.  For  Chri&t  was  borna 
in  his  oion  hands  when  commending  his  own  proper  body,  he  said,  '•  this  is  ra;y 

body,'  FOR  HE  CARRIED  THAT  BODY  W1  Ms  OWn   httvds.^^ 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBTANTIATION.    209 

Some  polemical  smatterers  have  endeavoured  to  evade  this 
manifest  argument,  by  observing  that  Christ  might  carry  his  body 
in  his  hands,  as  a  king  or  prince  might  carry  his  own  picture  ; 
but  the  difference  between  these  feeble  disputants  and  St.  Augus- 
tin  is,  that  St.  Augustin  held  and  believed  Clirist  to  have  carried 
in  his  hands,  his  own  true,  real,  and  substantial  body,  which  he 
affirms,  no  mere  mortal  could  eij'eciuate  ;  whereas,  according  to 
those  gentlemen,  Christ  only  did  what  every  man  could  easily  per- 
form— carry  about  his  body  figuraiivehj — representatively,  &c. 

St.  Augustin  Concione  in  Psalmum,  33,  thus  writes : — 

"  There  was,  you  are  all  aware,  first  the  sacrifice  of  the  Jews,  which  con- 
sisted in  victims  of  cattle,  and  that  in  a  mystery.  The  sacrifice  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  our  Lord  which  the  faithfiil  know  who  read  the  gospel,  but 
which  all  do  not  know,  and  which  it  were  to  be  wished  some  did  not  know  to 
their  condemnation,  was  not  then  instituted,  which  sacrifice  is  now  established 
all  over  the  world." 

Again  in  Lib.  22,  De  Civit  Dei.  cap.  iii,  he  relates  the  follow- 
ing fact : 

"  A  certain  man  called  Hesperius  of  the  Tribunitial  order,  who  still  liveth 
convenient  to  us,  hath  a  little  farm  called  Zubedi  in  the  territories  of  Fusali, 
which  he  having  believed  by  the  injury  done  his  servants  and  cattle  to  be  haun- 
ted with  evil  spirits,  besought  my  priests  in  my  absence  that  one  of  them 
should  go  thither  and  expel  them  by  prayers  ;  one  accordingly  went — offered 
there  the  sacrifice  of  Christ's  body,  praying  with  all  his  might  that  this  evil 
would  cease,  and  by  the  mercy  of  God  it  did  cease." 

The  above  passage,  you  will  perceive,  establishes  not  only  the 
doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  but  also  the  holy  sacrifice  of  the 
Mass. — Were  a  priest  of  the  present  day  to  offer  up  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  Mass  for  the  expulsion  of  evil  spirits,  and  the  preser- 
vation of  cattle,  what  an  outcry  would  be  raised  by  the  "  Saints" 
against  him,  as  if  the  practice  were  idolatrous,  superstitious,  and 
damnable. 

*'  Christ  took  upon  him  earth  from  the  earth,  because  his  flesh  is  from  the 
flesh  of  Mary,  and  because  he  here  walked  in  this  flesh,  even  this  same  flesh 
he  gave  to  us  to  eat  for  our  salvation  :  but  no  one  eateth  this  flesh  without 
h&VmgJirst  adored  it :  and  not  only  do  we  not  sin  by  adoring  it,  but  we  sin 
by  not  adoring  it.  But  is  it  the  flesh  that  quickeneth  ?  The  Lord  in  exalting 
this"  earth  to  us,  informs  us  that  it  is  the  spirit  that  quickeneth— the  flesh  profiteth 
nothing.  Wherefore,  in  abasing  yourself  and  in  casting  yourself  down  before 
any  matter  whatever,  consider  it  not  as  matter,  but  consider  in  it  that  holy  one 
of  whom  the  body  which  you  adored  is  the  footstool.  For  it  is  for  his  sake 
that  you  adore  it"— In  Psal.  98. 

"  The  man  Jesus  Christ,  though  in  the  form  of  God,  he  receive  sacrifice 
with  his  Father,  yet  in  the  form  of  a  servant  he  chose  rather  to  be  himself  a 
Bacrifice,  than  to  receive  it — thus  he  is  the  priest,  himself  offering,  and  himsell 
the  victim."— De  Civit.  Del.  Lib.  x. 

Speaking  of  the  Jews  converted  by  St.  Peter,  he  says, 

**  They  were  converted,  they  were  baptized,  they  approached  the  table  of 
the  Lord,  and  now  believing  they  drank  that  blood  which  in  their  rage  the^ 
had  shed." — Sermo  76.     De  verb.  Evan<iel.  I,  v,  Ed.  Bened. 

18* 


210  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUB3TANTIATI0N. 

"  We  receive  with  a  faithful  heart  and  mouth,  the  Mediator  of  God  «Lti<l 
man — the  man  Christ  Jesus,  who  has  given  us  his  body  to  eat,  and  his  blood 
to  drink  ;  although  it  may  appear  more  horrible  to  eat  the  flesh  of  a  man  than 
to  destroy  it,  and  to  drink  human  blood  than  to  spill  it." 

St*  Hilary  in  his  eighth  book  on  the  Trinity — 

"  Therefore,  If  Christ  did  truly  take  to  himself  the  flesh  of  our  body,  and 
that  this  man  who  was  born  of  Mary  is  truly  Christ,  and  that  we  truly  take 
under  a  mystery  or  veil  the  flesh  of  his  body,  and  by  this  will  be  one  with  him 
because  the  Father  is  in  him,  and  he  in  us  ;  how  is  the  unity  of  will  asserted, 
jince  the  natural  propriety  by  the  sacrament  is  a  sacrament  of  perfect  unity  ? 
We  must  not  speak  with  human  or  worldly  sense  of  the  things  of  God.  Let 
us  read  the  things  that  are  written  and  understand  what  we  read,  and  then  we 
shall  discharge  the  office  of  perfect  faith.  For  what  we  say  of  the  natural 
truth  of  Christ  in  us,  unless  we  learn  it  from  himself,  we  foolishly  and  impi- 
ously say.  For  he  saith,  ^wy  flesh  is  truly  food  and  my  blood  is  truly  drink  ;* 
there  is  no  room  left  to  doubt  of  the  truth  of  his  flesh  and  blood  :  for  now 
both  by  the  declaration  of  our  Lord  himself  and  by  our  faith,  it  is  truly  flesh 
and  truly  blood." 

St.  Augustin,  in  his  27th  tract  upon  St.  John,  commenting  on 
the  words,  "  the  flesh  proiiteth  nothing'' — thus  argues  : 

"  What  means  *the  flesh  profiteth  nothing?  It  profits  nothing  as  the  Jewt 
understood  it — as  it  is  torn  in  pieces  in  a  dead  body — {quomodo  in  cadavere 
dilaniatur  aut  in  macello  venditur,)  or  sold  in  the  shambles.  But  it  profits  as 
quickened  by  the  spirit ;  for  if  the  flesh  profited  nothing  the  Word  would  not 
have  been  made  flesh  that  he  might  dwell  in  us." 

I  have  quoted  St.  Augustin's  opinion  to  you  ;  I  could,  if  time 
permitted,  refer  you  to  eighty-seven  Fathers,  of  whom  all  agree 
in  giving  the  same  interpretation  to  the  passages  referred  to.  If 
ever  there  was  an  era  in  the  Christian  church  when  transubstan- 
tiation  was  not  received  and  acknowledged  as  the  doctrine  of 
the  church,  there  should  be  some  public  formulary  of  prayer — 
some  public  and  well  established  Liturgy,  out  of  which  that 
doctrine  was  excluded.  I  will  prove  (for  I  have  the  Liturgies 
here,)  that  this  doctrine  has  been  inculcated  in  all  of  them  from 
the  first  era  of  Christianity  down  to  the  period  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. I  have  here  also  the  Liturgy  even  of  Nestorius.  After 
he  broached  his  heresy  in  the  east,  he  framed  a  Liturgy  for  his 
followers,  in  which  he  professes  his  belief  in  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation.  Simeon,  of  Thessalonica,  who  flourished 
before  the  council  of  Florence,  and  who  was  in  great  repute 
among  the  Greeks,  says, 

"  When  the  priest  or  deacon  has  said  with  a  loud  voice  ra  ayia  rois  ayion 
*  holy  things  are  for  the  holy.'  When  the  bishop,  the  priests,  and  the  deacons 
have  received,  and  when  the  body  and  blood  are  mixed  together  in  the  chalice 
for  the  communicants,  the  priest  or  deacon  carries  the  sacred  relics  of  the 
divine  bread  in  the  sacred  chalice.  He  shows  them  to  all  the  people  ;  that 
is,  he  shows  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  which  is  his  proper  body  and  his  true 
blood,  which  he  has  sacrificed  for  us,  his  purchased  people,  which  he  gives 
us,  and  permits  us  to  taste,  to  see,  and  to  feel  :  where  the  holy  people  see 
him  with  the  soul,  they  adore  him  and  ask  of  him  whatever  is  necessary  for 
their  s/ilvation." 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUES  IAIN  TIATION.         211 

And  a  little  after  he  says, 

"  They  ought  to  prostrate  themselves  on  the  ground,  and  to  adore  Nvith  all 
fheir  souls  the  living  bread,  which,  with  the  blood,  is  in  the  chalice." 

Mr.  Pope — Gentlemen,  Mr.  Maguire's  first  and  direct  proof 
of  transubstantiation  is  taken  from  the  priesthood  of  Melchise- 
dech,  who,  he  informs  us,  offered  up  bread  and  wine.  The 
Douay  version  translates  the  18th  verse  of  the  14th  chapter  of 
Genesis,  thus  : 

"  But  Melchisedech,  king  of  Salem,  bringing  forth  bread  and  wine,  for  h« 
was  priest  of  the  Most  High  God,  blessed  him,  and  said" — 

The  expression,  you  perceive,  is,  "  brought  forth  bread  and 
wine,"  not  "  offered  up  bread  and  wine."  Pererius,  a  Jesuit, 
says,  that 

"  There  is  nothing  here  concerning  oblation,  but  the  bringing  forth  of  bread 
and  wine,  not  to  God,  but  to  Abraham,  as  is  proved  by  reference  to  Augustin 
and  Ambrose." 

There  is  a  strange  alteration  in  the  text  of  the  Douay  Bible. 
It  is  said,  for  he  was  the  priest  of  the  most  High  God.  Pererius 
informs  us  that  the  Hebrew,  literally  rendered,  should  be,  "  and 
he  was,"  and  not  "  for  he  was."  Melchisedech  blessed  Abra- 
ham ;  the  blessing  Abraham,  and  not  the  bringing  forth  of  bread 
and  wine,  was  characteristic  of  the  priesthood  of  Melchisedech. 
Cardinal  Cajetan  states,  "  That  which  is  introduced,  touching 
the  priesthood  of  Melchisedech,  is  a  separate  clause." 

Christ,  because  he  lives  for  ever,  has  an  unchangeable  priest- 
hood ,  and  therefore  needs  not  transfer  it  to  others.  The  woid 
"  priest,"  is  a  corruption  of  the  French  word  "  petre,"  which  is 
derived  froin  the  Greek,  "  nqsa^viEqog^^^  signifying  an  elder. 
I  here  challenge  Mr.  Maguire  to  produce  a  single  passage  in  the 
New  Testament,  where  the  minister  of  the  gospel  is  designated 

^IBQBVg 

My  friend  has  brought  forward,  in  support  of  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation,  passages  from  the  gospel  of  John  and  from 
the  words  of  our  Saviour,  in  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  supper. 
I  put  it  to  every  rational  man,  whether  such  a  doctrine  as  transub' 
stantiation,  which  contradicts  reason,  and  the  senses  given  to  us  by 
God  himself, — the  very  evidence  on  which  the  resurrection  is  estab* 
lished, — should  not  be  built  upon  plain,  decided,  and  ungztestionablt 
passages  ^ 

I  shall  quote  to  you  the  opinions  of  a  number  of  Roman  Catholic 
ecclesiastics  and  writers,  acknowledging  that  the  scriptures  do 
not  evidently  prove  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  Bellar- 
mine,  (De  Euch.  1.  3,  c.  23,)  Suarez,  (in  3  dis.  49,  qu.  75,  sec.  2,) 
and  Vasquez  (in  9  part.  disp.  180,  qu.  75,  art.  2,  c.  15,)  admit, 
that  Scotus  acknowledges  that  this  doctrine  cannot  be  proved 
cleai  }y  from  scripture.    Bellarmine  allows  that  this  opinion  is  not 


212    THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATIC  .f 

improbable  ;  and  Suarez  and  Vasquez  confess,  thai  Durandua 
made  a  similar  statement. — (in  Sent.  1.  4,  dist.  11,  qu.  1,  n.  16.) 
Ocham,  another  celebrated  schoolman,  expressly  rem^irks,  that 

"  The  doctrine  which  holds  that  the  substance  of  bread  and  >nne  remains 
after  consecration,  is  neither  repugnant  to  reason  nor  to  scripture." — (In  4, 
Sent.  a.  5,  et  auodl.  4,  a.  3.) 

Gabriel  Biel,  another  great  divine  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
freely  declares,  that — 

"  As  to  any  thing  expressed  in  the  canon  of  the  scriptures,  a  man  may 
believe  that  the  substance  of  bread  and  wine  doth  remain  after  cx>»isccration." 

And  therefore  he  ascribes  transubstantiation  to  some  other 
revelation  beside  scripture,  with  which  he  supposes  the  church  of 
Rome  was  favoured. — (in  Canon  Miss.  Lect.  40.) 

Cardinal  De  Allaco,  of  Cambray,  plainly  informs  us,  that — 

"  The  doctrine  of  the  substance  of  bread  and  wine  remaining  after  conse- 
cration is  more  easy  arid  free  from  absurdity^  more  rationaly  and  no  ways  repug" 
nanl  to  the  authority  of  scripture^ 

Nay  more,  that  for  the  other  doctrine,  viz.  of  transubstantiation, 

"  There  is  no  evidence  in  scripture.^^ — (In  4,  Sen.  Q..  6.  Art.  2.) 

Cardinal  Cajetan  confesses  that, 

"  The  gospel  no  where  expresses  that  the  bread  is  changed  mto  the  body 
of  Christ ;  that  we  have  this  from  the  authority  of  the  church." 

Nay  he  goes  further, 

"  That  there  is  nothing  in  the  gospel  which  enforceth  any  man  to  under- 
stand these  words  of  Christ,  '  this  is  my  body,'  in  a  proper  and  not  in  a  meta- 
phorical sense  ;  but  the  church  having  understood  them  in  a  proper  sense, 
they  are  to  be  so  explained." — (In  Aquin.  3,  part.  Gtu.  75,  Art  1.) 

I  might  add  several  quotations,  to  show  that  it  is  the  opinion 
of  many  other  Roman  Catholic  divines,  that  the  doctrine  of  tran- 
substantiation is  not  supported  by  holy  writ.  My  friend  has 
referred  us  to  the  6th  of  John.  He  has  dwelt  on  the  superi- 
ority of  the  bread  of  which  Christ  speaks,  to  the  manna  which 
supported  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  ;  and  contends,  that  if 
that  bread  be  not  literally  the  body  of  Christ,  it  possesses  no 
superiority  above  the  manna.  I  ask,  what  was  it  that  came  down 
from  heaven  ?  "I  am  the  living  bread  that  came  down  from 
heaven."  Was  it  the  body  of  Christ  1  Was  it  the  sensible, 
corporeal  .framed  I  put  this  again  to  you.  No — the  body  was 
received  from  the  Virgin  Mary  :  but  Christ  in  his  divine  nature 
came  from  above  :  Christ  in  his  divine  nature  is  the  bread  on 
which  his  people  feed,  spiritually,  not  carnally  :  they  are  nour- 
ished by  the  truths  in  which  they  believe.  In  this  consists  the 
superiority  of  the  bread  of  life  above  the  manna  in  the  wilderness. 

My  friend  has  asked,  would  the  Saviour  have  allowed  the 
people  of  Capernaum  to  lie  under  a  mistake  ?      It  ill  becomes 


THE    DOCTRJ..E    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION.  213 

US  lo  pry  into  the  mysterious  proceedings  of  infinite  Wisdom. 
'  Unto  you,"  said  Christ  to  his  disciples,  "  it  is  given  to  know 
"he  mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  but  to  them  that  are 
ivithout  in  parables."  I  am  told  not  only  that  the  Jews  murmured 
it  his  language,  but  that  some  of  his  disciples  departed  from  him. 
They  that  were  not  his  real  followers,  and  had  not  been  taught  by 
^im,  is  manifest  by  the  fact  that  they  misunderstood  the  spiritual 
meaning  of  the  Saviour's  words,  and  by  their  departure  from  him. 
If  Mr.  Maguire  adduces  this  chapter  in  support  of  transubstari- 
tiation,  it  proves  too  much.  In  the  same  chapter  it  is  said, 
"  He  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood,  hath  everlasting  life." 
If  such  passages  prove  transubstantiation,  then  every  individual, 
whatever  his  character  may  be,  who  partakes  of  the  outward 
elements,  is  in  possession  of  everlasting  life  !  Our  Saviour 
throws  light  upon  the  import  of  his  language  when  he  says, 

"  He  that  cometh  to  me,  shall  never  hunger,  and  he  that  believeth  on  mo 
shall  never  tliirst."— (v.  35.) 

My  friend  will  acknowledge,  that  believing  is  a  spiritual  act  ; 
and  yet  the  Saviour  distinctly  says,  "  He  that  believeth  on  me 
shall  never  thirst."  In  strict  accordance  with  this  view  is  the 
remark  of  Augustin  : 

"  Why  preparest  thou  thy  teeth  and  stomach  ?  BeVievt,  and  thou  hast  eaten 
!«."— Tract  25. 

Such  is  the  language  of  Augustin.  Does  not  the  Redeemer 
himself  say, 

"  The  spirit  quickeneth,  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  ;  the  words  that  I  have 
spoken  to  you,  are  spirit  and  Ufe." — John,  vi,  46. 

And  when  he  asked  those  disciples  who  remained  with  him, 
"  Will  ye  also  go  away  1" — they  replied, 

"  To  vv'hom  shall  we  go  ?  Thou  hast  the  toords  of  eternal  life,  and  we  have 
Defleved  and  known,  that  thou  art  Christ  the  son  of  God." 

Christ  also,  in  reference  to  Judas  and  the  disciples  who 
departed  from  him,  says, 

"  There  are  some  of  you  that  believe  not  For  Jesus  knew  from  the  begin- 
ning who  they  were  that  did  not  believe,  and  who  he  was  that  would  betray 
him." — 65,  v. 

Origen  thus  speaks  : 

"  There  is  also  in  the  New  Testament  a  letter,  which  kills  him  who  doth 
not  spintually  understand  "jhose  things  which  are  said  :  for  if  we  take  accord- 
ing to  the  letter  that  which  is  said,  except  ye  can  eat  my  flesh,  and  drink  my 
blood,  this  letter  kills." — (Homil.  Levit.  chap.  10.) 

Augustin,  in  his  Treatise  de  Doctrina  Christiana,  says  : 

"  If  the  speech  be  a  precept  forbidding  some  heinous  wickedness  or  crime, 
or  commanding  us  to  do  good,  it  is  not  figurative  ;  but  if  it  seem  to  command 
any  heinous  wickedness  ir  crime,  or  to  forbid  that  which  is  profitable  or 


214  THE    DOCTRINE    OB^    TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 

beneficial  to  others,  it  is  figurative.  For  example,  *  except  ye  eat  the  flesh  ul 
the  Son  of  Man  and  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you.*  This  seems  to 
command  a  heinous  wickedness  and  crime  ;  thereforeit  is  a  figure;  command- 
ing us  to  communicate  of  the  passion  of  our  Lord,  and  with  df  light  and 
advantage  to  lay  up  in  our,  memory  (mark  it  is  not  the  body  of  Christ  in  our 
bodies,  but  to  lay  up  in  our  memmies)  that  his  flesh  was  crucified  and  wounded 
for  us. ' —  Lib.  iii,  torn,  iii,  p.  53,  Edit.  Basil,  1596.) 

Mr.  Maguire  has  referred  to  the  Saviour's  words  at  the  insti- 
tution of  the  Lord's  Supper,  •'  this  is  my  body,"  I  ask,  may  we 
not  interpret  the  expression  figuratively  1  Did  the  Redeemer 
always  speak  literally  ?  Does  he  not  say,  "  I*am  the  door," 
(John,  X,  9.)  "  I  am  the  vine?'  (John,  xv,  i.)  If  the  Redeemer 
spoke  even  once  figuratively,  he  may  have  spoken  figuratively 
on  this  occasion.  There  is  a  figure  in  the  following  passage, 
"This  is  my  blood  of  the  New  Testament."  Here  the  chalice 
is  the  blood  of  Christ  :  the  material  substance  of  the  cup  is 
according  to  the  letter  the  very  blood  of  Christ.  The  Saviour 
speaks,  we  perceive  figuratively  in  the  very  context.  Now,  if 
one  part  of  the  Saviour's  words  at  the  institution  of  the  Eucha- 
rist is  to  be  taken  literally,  why  not  the  rest?  But  are  we  to 
suppose  that  the  cup  is  transubstantiated  into  the  blood  of  Christ  ? 
I  would  also  ask  Mr.  Maguire,  is  there  not  another  specimen  of 
figurative  language  in  the  expression,  "  this  is  my  blood  which 
is  shed  ?"  Was  the  Saviour's  blood  shed  when  he  said,  "  it  is 
shed  ?"  Was  his  body  broken,  when  he  said,  "  it  is  broken  ?" 
My  friend  has  threatened  us  with  a  great  number  of  quotations 
from  the  Fathers ;  permit  me  to  call  your  attention  to  a  few, 
Tertullian  says — 

"  God,  in  your  gospel,  has  so  revealed  the  matter,  calling  the  bread  his  own 
body,  that  you  may  hence  understand  how  he  gave  bread  to  be  the.  figure 
of  his  own  body  ;  which  body,  conversely,  the  prophet  has  figurativeli 
called  bread,  the  Lord  himself  being  afterwards  about  to  interpret  this  sacra- 
ment."—Adv.  Marcion.  Lib.  iii,  §  12,  13,  p.  209 

Arguing  against  the  sceptics,  who  denied  the  certainty  of  sense, 
he  says — 

"  We  must  not  call  our  senses  in  question,  lest  we  should  doubt  respecting' 
their  fidelity  even  in  the  case  of  Christ  himself  Because,  if  we  question  the 
fidelity  of  our  senses,  we  might  peradventure  be  led  to  say,  that  Christ  delu- 
sively beheld  Satan  precipitated  from  heaven,  or  delusively  heard  the  voice  of 
his  Father,  testifying  of  him,  or  was  deceived  when  he  touched  Peter's  mother- 
in-law,  or  smelt  a  different  odour  of  the  ointment  which  he  received  for  his 
sepulture,  or  tasted  a  different  flavour  of  the  wine  which  he  consecrated  in 
memory  of  his  blood." — De  Anim.  in  cap,  de  quinque  sens.  oper.  p.  653. 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem  says, 

"  With  all  assurance,  let  us  partake  as  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ : 
for  under  the  type  of  bread.  His  body  is  given  to  thee,  and  under  the  type  of 
wine  his  blood  is  given  to  thee  ;  that  so  thou  mayst  partake  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  being  one  body  and  one  blood  with  him." — Catech.  Mystag. 
iv,  p.  217, 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    2lj 

Chrysostom  says, 

"  Under  the  name  of  fl^sh  scripture  is  wont  alike  to  set  foith  themy&teriea 
and  the  whole  church  :  for  it  says,  that  they  are  each  the  body  of  Christ." — 
Comment  in  Epist  ad.  Galat.  c.  v,  oper.  vol.  ix,  p.  1022.  Commel.  1603. 

Again, 

"  Wherefore  let  there  approach  no  Judas  partaking  of  the  poison  of  iniquity ; 
for  the  Eucharist  is  spiritual  food." — De  Prodit.  Jud.  Serm.  30,  oper.  vol  v, 
p.  464. 

Augustin  says— 

"  The  Lord,  when  he  ^ave  the  sign  of  his  body,  did  not  doubt  to  say,  thi- 
is  my  body." — Contr.  Adiman.  c.  12,  oper.  vol.  vi,  p.  69,  Colon.  1616. 

Again- — 

"  In  the  history  of  the  New  Testament,  so  great  and  so  marvelous  was  the 
patience  of  our  Lord,  that  bearing  with  Judas,  though  not  ignorant  of  his 
purpose,  he  admitted  him  to  the  banquet,  in  which  he  commended  and  deliv- 
erea  to  his  disciples  the  figure  of  his  own  body  and  blood." — Enarr.  in  Ps. 
iii,  oper.  vol.  viii,  p.  7. 

Again, 

"  Christ  instructed  his  disciples,  and  said  unto  them — *  it  is  the  spirit  that 
quickeneth,  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  :  the  words  which  I  speak  unto  you, 
are  spirit  and  life  ;'  as  if  he  had  said,  understand  spiritually  what  I  have 
spoken  :  you  are  not  about  to  eat  this  identical  body  which  you  see,  and  you 
are  not  about  to  drink  this  identical  blood,  which  they  who  crucify  me,  will 
pour  out ;  on  the  contrary,  I  have  commended  a  certain  sacrament  unto  you, 
which  will  vivify  you  if  spiritually  understood,  though  it  must  be  cele- 
brated visibly,  yet  it  must  be  understood  invisibly." — Enarr.  in  Ps.  xcviii, 
oper.  vol.  viii,  p.  397. 

Pope  Gelasius  is  of  the  same  opinion. — De  Duab.  Nat.  Christ. 
Cont.  Nestor,  et  Eutych.  in  Biblioth.  Patr.  vol.  4,  p.  422. 

I  now  meet  my  friend's  challenge  as  to  ancient  liturgies.  In 
different  liturgies,  even  after  the  words  of  consecration,  and  after 
some  prayers,  the  priest  beseeches  God  to  make  this  bread  the  holy 
bodij  of  Christ,  and  this  cup  the  precious  blood  of  Christ,  These 
are  the  words  used  in  the  formulary  called  the  liturgy  of  James, 
and  the  like  prayer  after  the  words  of  consecration  occurs  in  the 
liturgies  of  Mark,  John,  Chrysostom  and  Basil.  Is  it  not  an 
article  of  faith  in  the  curch  of  Rome,  that  when  the  words  of 
consecration  are  once  pronounced,  no  bread  or  wine  remains, 
but  the  real  body  and  blood  of  Christ  ;  and  is  not  the  Host 
immediately  elevated  and  adored  ?  If  the  authors  of  these 
liturgies  held  the  same  doctrine,  is  it  not  absurd,  that  they  should 
offer  a  prayer  to  God,  to  do  that  which  they  believed  had  been 
already  done  ;  to  make  the  bread  and  wine  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ,  a  thing  which  they  believed  had  been  already  done,  if 
they  were  of  the  same  opinion  with  the  church  of  Rome  ? 

The  authors  of  the  Mass  did  not  themselves  believe  in  tran 
substantiation  ;  they  oflen  call  the  Eucharist  an  image,  a  pledge. 
(ex  Miss.  Sar.  et  Ro  )     Why  should  they  call  it  an  image,  a 


216    THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

pledge,  if  they  believed  it  to  be  the  thing  itself?     The  Sarum 
Missal  (Fer  Quat.  Temp.)  confesses  that, 

"  God  would  have  his  sacraments  consist  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth  :"  they 
plainly  acknowledge  of  the  sacrament,  "  Cibavit  eos  ex  adipe  frumenti,"  he 
fed  them  with  the  flower  of  wheat ;  wherefore  by  their  own  acknowledgment, 
the  sacrament  which  is  eaten,  is  the  fruit  of  the  earth,  and  the  flower  of  wheat 
(Ex  horis  de  5,  Sacr.  impr.  per  Sac.  Keruer,  Paris,  Ann.  1570,  et  in  Ro.  Miss, 
in  solen.  Sacratis.  Corpor.  Chri.  in  princip.) 

In  the  Post-communion,  after  every  bishop-confessor,  the 
Roman  Missal,  and  the  Missal  of  Sarum,  in  the  Post-commu- 
nion prayer  (Feria  Sixta)  say, 

"  We  beseech  thee,  0  Lord,  that  giving  thanks  unto  thee  for  these  gifts  which 
we  have  received,  we  may  receive  better  giftsJ^ 

But  if  Christ  be  substantially  present,  what  better  gift  could 
they  desire  than  the  Saviour  himself !  In  another  place  they 
pray, 

"  That  which  we  have  received  with  our  mouths,  0  Lord,  grant  that  with  pure 
minds  loe  may  also  take,  that  of  a  temporal  gift  it  may  be  made  an  eternal  remedy.^* 
(In  can.  Miss,  et  Ro.  Br.  Fer.  5,  post  po.  passionis.) 

Christ's  body  is  not  a  temporal,  but  an  everlasting  gift  and 
remedy.     Again, 

"  That  which  we  have  received  in  the  image  of  the  sacrament,  grant  we  may 
receive  by  manifest  participation.''^ 

After  the  same  manner  they  pray  again, 

*'  Let  thy  holy  sacraments  perfect,  0  Lord,  that  which  they  contain,  that  which 
v>e  do  now  in  show,  we  may  receive  in  the  certain  truth  of  things  themselves." 
|ln  Fest.  S.  Swythen.  in  Post-compignus  vitae  aeternse  in  miss.  Sar. 

They  confess  that  they  do  it  in  show.  I  ask,  if  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  were  actually  present,  would  they  have  used  this 
expression  1 

Again,  in  the  Post-communion  of  the  Mass  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  they  call  the  sacraments  the  helps  of  our  salvation,  salutis 
nostrse  subsidia  ;  but  if  they  were  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
it  would  be  blasphemy  to  call  him  the  help  of  salvation,  who  is 
salvation  itself. — (Miss.  Sar.  in  Post.  Com.  in  Miss.  Bea.  Yirg. 
Mar.)  In  the  secret  of  the  office  of  the  dead,  they  say,  receive 
O  Lordf  for  the  soul  of  thy  servant,  the  Host  which  thou  didst 
offer  to  God  the  Father  for  us  bountifully. — (Miss.  Sar.  in  offic. 
mort.)  If  the  Host  be  the  very  body  of  Christ,  then  to  offer 
Christ  to  himself  would  be  most  absurd.  In  the  canon  they 
pray,  that  God  would  accept  the  things  offered,  as  he  accepted  the 
sacrifice  of  his  holy  child  Ahel^  the  sacrifice  of  Mraham,  and  that 
which  JMelchisedech  offered.  I  ask,  would  it  not  be  blasphemy  to 
compare  the  sacrifices  of  Abel,  Abraham  and  Milchisedech. 
howe^  cr  holy,  with  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  ? 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    217 

Mr.  Maguire. — If  my  friend,  Mr.  Pope,  would  be  in  any 
manner  consistent  with  himself,  this  controversy  would  have  a 
speedy  termination.  It  is  no  difficult  matter  for  puny  man 
limited  as  he  is  in  understanding,  to  raise  objections  against  holy 
mysteries.  The  very  same  objections  which  Mr.  Pope  has 
urged  against  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  the  Socinian 
may  urge  against  the  Trinity — as  being  a  mystery  incompre- 
hensible to  human  reason.  Hear  the  words  spoken  here  on  the 
second  day  of  the  discussion  by  Mr.  Pope,  in  regard  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity,  as  given  in  the  Morning  Register  : 

"I  remember  that  reason  has  its  legitimate  province.  If  God  has  revealed 
the  fact  that  three  persons  are  one  in  the  Divine  essence,  but  not  how  that 
essence  is  formed,  1  believe  the  statement,  I  am  not  called  upon  to  believe 
how  it  is  effected.  It  is  not  for  us  to  bring  before  the  bar  of  natural  reason 
the  great  Being  who  makes  the  statement.  If  we  are  convinced  that  this  is  the 
book  of  God,  we  must  be  convinced  that  the  three  divine  persons  are  in  one. 
It  is  above  reason,  but  not  opposed  to  reason,  and  we  are  bound  to  receive  it." 

I  shall  answer  Mr.  Pope's  objections  by  his  own  arguments. 
Confining  myself  to  the  language  of  Mr.  Pope,  I  affirm,  that  if 
it  be  revealed  in  scripture,  that  the  sacred  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  are  bequeathed  to  us  as  a  legacy,  it  is  not  for  us  to  bring 
the  God  of  heaven  before  the  bar  of  natural  reason.  If  we  are 
convinced  that  the  statement  has  been  made,  we  must  be  con 
vinced  of  the  fact.  It  may  be  above  reason,  but  it  is  not  con 
trary  to  reason.  In  comn»on  consistency,  therefore,  he  is  bound 
to  receive  the  doctrine. 

Mr.  Pope  has  recurred  to  Melchisedech  ;  I  did  not  bring 
forward  Melchisedech  as  a  direct  proof,  though  perhaps  it  is 
tantamount  to  a  direct  one.  The  onus  lies  on  Mr.  Pope  to 
show  where  or  when  Melchisedech  did  offer  a  sacrifice,  if  not 
in  the  instance  to  which  reference  has  been  made.  Melchise- 
dech is  called  a  priest  of  the  Most  High.  If  in  this  instance 
Mr.  Pope  will  have  it  that  Melchisedech  merely  gave  bread  and 
wine  to  Abraham,  I  call  upon  him  to  show  where,  in  any  other 
mstance,  Melchisedech  is  recorded  to  have  offered  sacrifice  to 
the  Lord  ;  and  if  he  cannot,  why  is  Melchisedech  called  a  priest 
of  the  Most  High? 

I  prefer  to  Mr.  Pope's  version  of  the  scriptures  that  of  St. 
Jerome,  who  spent  fourteen  years  in  Palestine,  and  the  com- 
mentaries of  Dr.  Wall,  which  are  in  my  possession.  Mr.  Pope 
quotes  Catholic  authorities  to  show  that  there  is  not  evident 
proof  derivable  from  scripture,  for  the  doctrine  of  transubstan- 
tiation. There  is  not  mathematical  evidence,  such  as  2  and  2 
rhake  4 ;  for  what  is  evident  cannot  be  contested.  But  the 
proof  approaches  very  nearly  to  an  evident  one,  when  our  Saviour 
emphatically  says,  '*  this  is  my  body,"  "  this  is  my  blo(Td 
That  surely  is  a  very  close  approximation  to  evidence 

19 


218  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTI ATlON. 

Mr.  Pope  has  not  been  able  to  produce  any  Catholic  divines 
who  contradicted  the  doctrine  of  trarisubstantiation.  I  am  ready 
to  admit,  that  there  is  no  self-evident  proof  for  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation  ;  but  Christ  has  pronounced  the  words  "  this 
is  my  body — this  is  my  blood,"  and  I  therefore  believe. 

Let  Mr.  Pope  produce  any  passage  equally  clear  upon  the 
doctrines  of  the  Trinity — the  Incarnation,  or  any  other  doctrine 
of  Christianity.  Mr.  Pope  says,  that  Christ  came  down,  not  in 
his  body,  from  heaven.  I  assert  that  he  did  come,  as  to  his 
humanity,  from  heaven,  when  Mary  was  overshadowed  by  the 
Holy  Ghost ;  the  Saviour's  body  came  direct  from  the  power 
and  finger  of  God,  and  was  formed  of  the  substance  of  a  pure 
immaculate  virgin. 

My  Reverend  opponent  says,  that  the  Redeemer  was  in  the 
habit  of  speaking  in  parables.  Whenever  Christ  made  a  reve- 
lation of  an  article  of  faith,  did  he  speak,in  parables  1  When- 
ever such  a  revelation  is  made,  I  do  not  believe  our  Saviour 
propounds  it  parabolic  ally.  When  some  of  the  disciples  of 
Jesus  became  shocked  at  his  expressions  at  Capernaum,  and 
when  he  saw  the  Jews  alarmed  and  debating  with  themselves, 
and  he  himself  becoming  uneasy  about  this  fact,  as  is  evidenced 
by  his  subsequent  question  to  the  Apostles,  "  Will  you  also  leave 
me  1"  It  would  be  most  strange  that,  if  he  had  been  only  speak- 
ing metaphorically,  he  should  have,  as  it  were,  confirmed  them 
in  their  error,  by  adding  this  strong  expression — 

"Amen,  I  say  unto  you,  unless  you  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and 
drink  liis  blood,  you  shall  not  have  life  in  you." 

It  is  a  melancholy  instance  of  human  infirmity  to  find  such 
objections  raised  against  that  which  has  been  so  obviously  and 
evidently  revealed.  It  is  the  doctrine  of  the  council  of  Trent, 
that  he  who  receives  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  unworthily, 
eats  and  drinks  perdition  to  himself,  not  discerning  the  body 
of  the  Lord, 

Therefore,  when  the  doctors  of  the  church  speak  of  spiritual 
things,  they  mean  that  the  sacrament  may  be  really  received  by 
a  man  without  its  accompanying  spiritual  graces.  No  man  will 
deny,  that  baptism  is  a  representation  of  Christ's  death  and  re- 
surrection, by  regenerating  man  from  a  spiritual  death  to  a  spir- 
itual life — and  yet  it  is  acknowledged  to  be  a  real  sacrament, 
and  to  confer  real  grace.  Mr.  Pope  may  deny  the  fact  if  he 
choose,  but  I  have  all  the  Protestants  of  the  church  of  England 
with  me  on  the  subject.  Christ's  body  and  blood  are  a  reality, 
and  a  figure  at  one  and  the  same  time — they  are  not  given  in 
their  natural  and  gross  manner,  but  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  type 
in  the  old  law.  The  Pascal  Lamb  was  the  figure  of  Christ's 
body^  and  blood,  and  if  the  body  and  blood  be  not  present,  there 


THE  DOCTRINE  OP  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    219 

is  no  fiilfilinent  of  the  type  in  the  new  law.  If  the  sacramenl 
be  mere  bread  and  wine,  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  how  a  man 
who  receives  unworthily  can  eat  and  drink  damnation  to  himself. 
Our  Saviour  says  **  I  am  the  door ;  I  am  the  vine ;  1  am  the 
good  shepherd."  Mr.  Pope  concludes,  that  because  he  speaks 
figuratively  in  one  instance,  he  does  so  in  all.  When  our  Re- 
deemer said,  he  was  the  door  and  the  vine,  was  there  a  man  ot 
common  sense  listening  to  him,  who  did  not  know  that  he  spoke 
metaphorically?  The  expressions  were  not  violent  or  unnat- 
ural, they  were  in  accordance  with  the  general  tenor  of  the 
language  of  the  day.  But  if  he  had  taken  a  vine  in  his  hand, 
and  said,  "  I  am  this  vine" — or,  if  he  took  up  a  door  and  said, 
"  I  am  this  door" — or,  if  taking  hold  of  a  shepherd  he  said,  "  I 
am  this  shepherd  ;  then  would  the  metaphor  appear  extravagant 
and  absurd.  But  when  he  took  the  bread,  and  blessing  it  said, 
"  THIS  IS  MY  body" — there  evidently  was  no  metaphor  intended. 
Had  he  said,  "  this  bread  is  my  body,"  such  an  expression 
would  b®  truly  metaphorical,  but  "  this  is  my  body,"  clearly 
supposes  a  change  of  substance. 

VVhen,  at  the  marriage  of  Cana  of  Gallilee,our  Saviour  changed 
water  into  wine  there  was  a  real  transubstantiation.  If  he  had 
then  said,  "  this  water  is  wine,"  it  would  be  a  metaphor ;  but  if 
he  said,  "  this  is  wine,"  there  was  no  metaphor,  as  a  real  tran- 
substantiation had  taken  place,  and  there  was  no  water  there. 
When  Moses  changed  his  rod  into  a  serpent,  if  he  said,  "  this  is 
a  serpent,"  that  would  not  be  a  metaphor ;  but  had  he  said, 
"this  rod  is  a  serpent,"  there  he  would  speak  metaphorically 
When  Christ  therefore  said,  "  this  is  my  body,"  it  is  plain  and 
evident  that  he  did  not  speak  metaphorically.  If  a  person  asked 
for  some  good  wine,  and  that  in  reply  another  said  to  him,  "take 
Ihis  bottle,"  the  metaphor  is  natural  and  obvious  ;  but  if  he  said, 
handing  him  a  bottle  of  milk,  "this  bottle  is  wine,"  the  metaphor 
would  then  indeed  be  foolish,  extravagant  and  unintelligible. 
Mr.  Pope  has  quoted  the  words,  "  this  is  my  blood  which  is 
shed  for  many  for  the  remission  of  sins."  This  is  one  of  the 
strongest  proofs  in  support  of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 
If  the  expression  was,  "  shall  be  shed,"  it  might  seem  to  militate 
against  that  doctrine.  But  the  expression  "  is  shed,"  proves  that 
Christ  offered  himself  to  his  Father  before  he  had  actually  sui- 
fered,  and  applied  the  graces  annexed  to  the  sacrament  before 
he  had  actually  suffered  on  the  cross.  The  graces  which  were 
to  flow  from  that  offering  he  here  applied  in  the  sacrament,  for 
if  not,  there  was  no  sacrament  instituted.  NoW,  if  he  applied 
the  graces  before  his  death  in  the  sacrament,  I  am  at  a  loss  to 
know  why  the  action,  having  taken  place  previously  to  his  dei^th, 
should  form  any  bar  to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 


220    THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  has  been  quoted  by  my  friend.  You 
shall  hear  him  again,  and  you  can  then  decide  whether  it  be  not 
extremely  foolish  to  introduce  that  holy  Father  as  opposed  to 
transubstantiation.  After  quotino-  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  "1 
have  received  of  the  Lord  that  which  I  also  have  delivered  unto 
you,"  he  proceeds  to  say  : 

"  This  doctrine  of  the  blessed  Paul  may  be  sufficient  to  satisfy  you  con- 
cerning the  divine  mysteries  which  you  have  received,  that  you  have  been 
made  partakers  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  The  bread  and  wine,  which 
before  the  invocation  of  the  adorable  Trinity  were  nothing  but  bread  and 
wine,  became  after  this  invocation  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  The  Euchar- 
istic  bread,  after  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  no  longer  common  bread, 
but  the  body  of  Christ. — Wherefore,  I  conjure,  my  brethren,  not  to  consider 
them  any  more  as  common  bread  and  wine,  since  they  are  the  body  and 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  his  own  words ;  and  although  your  senses 
might  suggest  that  to  you,  let  faitih  confirm  you.  Judge  not  of  the  thing  by 
vour  taste,  but  by  faith  assure  yourself,  without  the  least  doubt,  that  you  are 
honoured  with  the  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  Christ.  That  which  appears 
bread  is  not  bread,  though  the  taste  judge  otherwise — the  wine  which  you  see, 
and  which  tastes  like  wine,  is  not  wine,  but  the  blood  of  Christ." 

Here  St.  Cyril  impresses  on  us  to  believe  the  real  presence 
of  Christ  in  the  sacrament,  though  the  doctrine  may  appear  con- 
trary to  some  of  our  senses.  Every  thing  which  St.  Cyril  here 
says,  makes  for  the  doctrine  which  I  now  advocate  ;  and  Mr. 
Pope  will  perform  a  greater  miracle  than  transubstantiation 
itself,  if  he  shall  demonstrate  that  St.  Cyril  was  opposed  to  that 
doctrine.  I  wonder  why  all  those  Fathers  should  take  such  ex- 
traordinary pains  to  impress  upon  the  minds  of  their  hearers  the 
absolute  necessity  of  believing  contrary  to  their  seeing,  touching, 
and  tasting,  if  there  were  nothing  in  that  sacrament  but  the  ele- 
ment of  bread  and  wine._ 

M.y  friend  has  quoted  St.  Augustin  likewise.  From  what 
1  have  quoted  already,  touching  the  sacraments,  from  this  great 
Father  of  the  church,  you  can  easily  perceive  that  he  speaks  most 
plainly  of  transubstantiation.  On  the  33d  Psalm  we  find,  that 
he  even  calls  this  mystery  the  sacrifice  of  the  body  and  blood  of 
our  Lord.     I  shall  give  you  his  original  words : 

"Erat  autem,  ut  nostis  sacrificium  .Tudaeorum  in  victimus  peccorum  secun- 
dum ordinum  Aaron,  et  hoc  in  mysterio;  nondum  erat  sacrificium  Corporis 
et  sanguinis  domini  quod  norunt  fideles  et  qui  evangelium  legerunt,  quod 
Bacrificiura  nunc  difFusum  est  in  toto  orb^  terrarum." 

"There  was  ye  are  aware,  first,  the  sacrifice  of  the  Jews,  which  consists 
in  victims  of  cattle,  according  to  the  order  of  Aaron  ;  and  this  in  a  myster}. 
The  sacrifice  of  the  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord  was  not  yet  instituted,  which 
the  faithful  know,  and  those  who  read  the  gospel,  which  sacrifice  is  now  es- 
tablished throughout  the  whole  world." 

If  there  be  nothing  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  but  m«re 
elements  of  bread  and  wine,  it  could  not,  nor  ought  it  to  be  called 
a  sacrifice.  But  St.  Augustin  styles  it  the  sacrifice  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  our  Lord.     It  is  manifest  then  that  he  held  a  total 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    221 

change  of  the  elements  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 
When  therefore  he  speaks  of  the  sacrament  as  something  spir- 
itual, he  only  draws  a  distinction  between  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ  in  a  carnal  or  gross  sense,  and  between  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  in  a  true,  substantial,  but  sacramental  sense. 
The  first  was  the  error  of  those  at  Capernaum,  as  St.  Augustin 
himself  describes  it.  "  Quomodo  in  cadevere  dilaniatur,  aut  m 
macello  venditur."  The  second  is  the  true  and  orthodox  sense, 
as  the  same  Father  explains  it.  "  Quomodo  spiritu  vegetatur." 
This,  I  think,  most  satisfactorily  reconciles  St.  Augustin's  ap- 
parent discrepancy.  I  here  request  that  you  will  reflect  upon 
the  passage  of  St.  Augustin,  where  he  describes  one  of  his 
priests  offering  up  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  for  the  servants  and 
cattle  of  Tribune. 

I  could  quote  several  other  passages  from  St.  Augustin,  if 
his  authority  were  called  in  question,  on  that  subject.  I  have 
sixty  or  seventy  Fathers,  (Ignatus,  Justin  Martyr,  Irenaeus, 
Tertullian,  Origen,  Hyppolitus,  and  Cyprian,  &c,  &c,  &c,) 
whom  I  could  also  quote  if  time  permitted.  The  extracts  are 
here  on  the  table.  I  take  not  their  words  mutatis  mutandis,  but 
I  am  ready  to  read  whole  passages  from  them,  where  they  treat 
on  this  subject  professedly.  St.  Augustin,  you  will  remember, 
in  his  Commentary  on  the  words  of  the  33d  Psalm,  "  ferebatur 
in  manibus  suis,"  says  that  our  Lord  carried  his  body  in  his  own 
hand,  at  his  last  supper.  After  such  passages,  it  is  idle  and 
foolish  in  the  extreme  to  quote  St.  Augustin  as  opposed  to  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  notice  the  other  objections  advanced 
by  Mr.  Pope.  The  book  of  Gelasius  is  doubted  by  many 
critics,  and  it  is  uncertain  whether  it  was  written  by  Pope  Gela- 
sius, or  by  Gelasius  Cyzinicus.  But  even  supposing  it  to  have 
been  written  by  Pope  Gelasius,  I  am  here  ready  to  show  that  it 
proves  nothing  against  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  as 
Hawarden  has  plainly  demonstrated.  Mr.  Pope  has  quoted  the 
ancient  Liturgies  to  show  that  prayers  were  offered  to  God  to 
change  the  elements  after  the  words  of  consecration  had  been 
pronounced.  Dr.  Brett,  a  Protestant,  and  who  was  by  no  means 
favourably  ir'clined  to  Popery,  translated  all  the  ancient  Litur- 
gies from  the  original  Greek.  I  am  ready  to  prove  from  every 
one  of  them,  that  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass  and  transubstantia- 
tion were  derived  from  the  Apostles,  and  believed  throughout  the 
church,  both  eastern  and  western.  In  the  Liturgy  of  St.  James, 
which  has  been  quoted  by  Mr.  Pope,  after  the  words  : 

"  This  is  my  body  which  is  broken  and  given  for  you,  for  the  remission  of 
Bins."  "This  is  my  blood  of  the  New  Testament,  vhich  is  shed  and  gi^en 
tor  you  and  for  many,  for  the  remission  of  sins." 

19* 


2U2  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

And,  after  some  prayers,  he  thus  addresses  himself  to  Al- 
mighty God, 

"Send  down,  O  Lord,  this  thy  most  holy  spirit  upon  us,  and  upon  these 
holy  gifts  here  set  before  thee :  that  by  his  holy,  good,  and  glorious  presence 
he  may  sanctify  and  make  this  bread  the  body  of  thy  Christ,  and  this  cup  the 
precious  blood  of  thy  Christ" 

It  was  here  objected  that  the  Greeks  did  not  believe  in  tran* 
substantiation,  because  after  the  words  of  consecration  they 
prayed  :  *'  Make  this  bread  the  holy  body  of  thy  Christ,  and  this 
cup  the  precious  blood  of  thy  Christ."  But  this  objection  was 
fully  answered  by  the  Greeks  themselves  in  the  council  of 
Florence,  who  by  the  mouth  of  Isidorus,  metropolitan  of  Syria, 
and  legate  of  the  patriarch  of  Antioch,  and  one  of  the  seven 
deputed  by  the  Greek  prelates  to  dispute  with  the  Latins,  replied 
that  the  Greeks  did  unanimously  believe  the  consecration  to  be 
valid,  and  the  change  to  be  effected  by  the  words  of  Christ : — 
"  This  is  my  body — this  is  my  blood  ;"  and  that  they  differed 
from  the  Latin  church,  merely  as  to  the  manner  of  explaining 
themselves.  But  that  having  found  the  above  prayer  in  the 
missals  of  Saints  Basil  and  Chrysostom,  which  they  then  used, 
and  which  were  extant  without  any  alteration,  long  before  the 
time  of  their  separation  from  the  Latin  church,  they  did  not  think 
fit  to  discard  it.  I  shall  give  you  the  words  of  Isidorus  himself 
as  they  were  taken  down  by  the  interpreter  of  the  said  council : — 

"Hoc  Missale  quo  utimur  est  traditum  a  Basilio  et  beato  Chrysostomo: 
utebamur  autem  eo  ante  tempus  schismatis,  nee  aliqua  facta  est  mutatio; 
tamen  occidentalis  Ecclesia  nunquam  (^  hoc  verbum  fecit,  videhcet  cum 
fuerimus  Concordes,  et  ad  eundem  finem  tendentes;  secundum  rem  dicimus 
idem,  etcredimus  id  quod  conficit  mysterium  esse  sermonem  Domisii,  et  Domi- 
nicam  vocem  esse  eifectricem  divinorum  munerum,  et  ilia  vox  semper  explicatur 
a  sacerdote,  et  suscipit  sacerdes  quod  vox  replicata  aptetur,  et  sit  cadem  vox 
cum  voce  Domini ;  et  ut  ita  aptetur,  invocatur  spiritus  sanctus  et  supplicat 
Bacerdos,  ut  per  virtutem  spiritus  sancti  concedatur  gratia  ut  vox  repetita 
efficiatur  ita  effectiva,  ut  verbum  Dei  fuit ;  et  ita  credimus  consummativa 
fieri  per  illam  orationem  sacerdotis.  Dominicse  voces  habent  operationem  ut 
scmina,  quia  sine  semine  non  potest  effici  fructus;  ita  in  hoc  dominica  voce: 
tamen  ubi  cadet  semen,  eget  aliis  instrumentis  ut.  sacerdotis,  altaris,  oratio- 
num,  undo  credimus  per  hoc  vobiscum  esse  Concordes." 

"  This  Missal  which  we  use  was  delivered  to  us  by  St.  Basil  and  St.  Chry» 
Bostom,  and  it  is  the  same  we  used  before  the  time  of  the  schism :  nor  is  there 
any  change  made  in  it;  yet  the  Latin  church  never  made  any  exception  on 
thio  head,  inasmuch,  as  we  were  of  one  accord,  and  tending  to  the  same  end. 
We  in  reality  say  the  same  thing,  and  believe  that  that  which  completes  the 
mystery  is  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  that  the  word  of  our  Lord  produces  tiie 
divine  gifts,  and  that  the  word  is  always  expressed  by  the  priest,  and  the 
priest  takes  care  that  the  word  repeated  should  be  adapted  to,  and  be  the 
same  with  the  word  of  our  Lord  ;  and  that  it  may  be  so  adapted,  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  invoked,  and  the  priest  prays  that  by  virtue  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
grace  may  be  granted,  that  the  repeated  word  may  be  made  as  effective  as 
llie  word  of  God  was.  And  so  we  believe  that  it  becomes  consummated  by 
tliat  prayer  of  the  priest,     I'he  words  of  our  Lord  are  operative  like  seed. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    223 

Tor  as  fruit  cannot  be  produced  without  seed,  so  it  is  in  this  word  of  our  Lord, 
yet  where  this  seed  falls  it  requires  other  instruments,  for  example  a  priest, 
an  altar,  and  prayers,  whence  we  beheve  that  in  this  matter  we  substantially 
accord  with  you." 

Mr.  Pope. — Mr.  Maguire,  in  maintaining  the  doctrine  of 
transubstantiation,  observed,  that  it  is  such  a  mystery,  that  we 
are  not  to  pry  into  it,  and  endeavoured  to  institute  a  comparison 
between  it  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  I  deny  altogether 
that  any  parallelism  exists.  On  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  we 
are  incapable  of  exercising  our  senses.  Man,  by  the  mere 
exercise  of  sense,  cannot  find  out  the  Almighty.  An  infinite 
distance  exists  between  the  Divine  nature  and  my  faculties. 
But  my  senses,  in  their  legitimate  province,  are  a  divine  reve- 
lation, and  the  direct  inlets  of  knowledge  to  the  mind.  Though 
Ihey  cannot  investigate  the  nature  of  God,  for  it  is  above  their 
reach,  I  can  bring  one  and  all  of  them  to  bear  upon  transubstan- 
tiation ;  and  their  united  testimony  is,  that  the  bread  is  bread, 
and  the  wine  is  wine.  Hence  no  parallel  can  be  drawn  between 
transubstantiation  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

My  friend  has  said,  that  the  onus  rests  on  me  to  show,  that 
Melchisedech  made  an  offering,  in  order  to  demonstrate  the 
priesthood.  I  answer,  that  it  is  quite  sufficient  for  me,  that  God 
has  called  him  a  priest.  I  have  already  referred  to  Roman 
Catholic  authority  to  show,  that  the  word  translated  "  brought 
FORTH,"  is  properly  rendered,  the  original  expression  having  no 
reference  to  oblation  ;  that  the  word  rendered  ''^for^''  in  the 
Douay  Bible,  does  not  signify  '^'^for^''  but  "  and^''  and  that  the 
latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  verse  is  a  separate  clause. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  told  us,  that  two  and  two  make  four.  Does 
he  mean  to  introduce  this  arithmetical  calculation  to  illustrate 
the  proposition,  that  thai  xohich  has  all  the  properties  of  bread  is 
flesh?  Such  a  position  I  maintain,  is  absurd,  opposed  to  the 
common  sense  of  mankind,  to  the  testimony  of  our  senses,  and 
contradictory  to  the  doctrines  of  holy  writ. 

My  friend  has  said,  that  the  body  of  Christ  came  down  from 
above  in  consequence  of  his  preternatural  generation,  through 
the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  I  would  refer  him  to  the  language 
of  the  Athanasian  creed,  which  Mr.  Maguire  has  subscribed. 
That  formulary,  speaking  of  the  Saviour  says,  "God  of  the 
substance  of  the  Father,  begotten  before  the  world,  and  man  of 
the  substance  of  his  mother,  born  in  the  world."  So  much  for 
Mr.  Maguire's  theological  accuracy. 

My  friend  has  said,  that  the  council  of  Trent  holds,  thaf 
although  man  may  partake  of  the  body  and  blood,  soul  and 
divinity  of  Christ,  yet,  if  he  possesses  not  the  grace  of  God,  he 
s^hall  perish.     1  v\  ould  ask  a  simple  question.     Why  should  the 


224         THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIA  TION. 

council  of  Trent  take  one  part  of  our  Saviour's  words  literaily 
and  in  other  passages,  where  the  scripture  militates  against  the 
views  of  the  church  of  Rome,  reject  the  literal  sense? 

Mr.  Maguire  has  said,  if  the  Saviour  took  the  door  in  his 
*  hands  and  said,  "I  am  this  door;"  or  if  he  took  the  vine  in  hi^ 
hand,  and  said,  "  I  am  this  vine,"  the  case  would  have  been 
different — but  methinks  transubstantiation  is  still  more  absurd ; 
for  he  supposes  Christ  to  intimate,  "  Here  am  I,  sitting  with  you 
nt  the  table,  circumscribed  as  to  mv  humanity,  and  this  bit  of 
bread  which  I  hold  in  my  hand  is  my  body ;  I  grasp  this  body 
within  the  palm  of  my  hand,  and  I  give  this  body  from  myself 
to  you.  I  give  myself  from  myself,  to  be  partaken  of  before  my 
eyes."  My  friend  has  referred  us  to  the  marriage-feast.  I  am 
glad  that  he  has  reminded  us  of  a  sensible  transubstantiation.  I 
imagine  that  the  guests  saw  that  the  water  was  changed  into 
wine,  and  from  their  taste  also,  were  conscious  of  the  change. 
My  friend  perceives,  that  they  had  only  to  exercise  their  senses 
to  discover,  that  that  which  had  been  water,  with  all  the  proper- 
ties of  water,  was  now  wine,  with  all  the  properties  of  wine. 

If  Mr.  Maguire  allowed  his  flock  to  exercise  their  senses 
they  too  would  find,  that  after  consecration  the  bread  is  still 
bread,  and  the  wine  still  wine.  Mr.  Maguire  has  made  an 
extraordinary  statement,  that  Christ  offered  himself  up,  before 
he  offered  himself  up  !  He  should  be  loath  to  throw  out  insin- 
uations against  the  correctness  of  my  quo&itions — I  have  already 
exposed  him.  Was  he  not  detected  yesterday  in  a  quotation 
from  a  work,  to  the  original  of  which  I  referred  you?  He  says, 
that  he  quotes  from  originals — I  will  not  charge  my  friend  with 
an  intention  wilfully  to  mislead  us, — he  was,  I  will  admit,  him- 
self deceived,  having  implicitly  confided  in  the  quotations  placed 
in  his  hands;  but  I  say,  Mr.  Maguire  should  be  cautious.  I  have 
several  other  quotations.      St.  Augustin  says  upon  the  words  : 

"  *  Me  ye  have  not  always.'  He  speaks  of  the  presence  of  his  body ;  ye 
shall  have  me  according  to  my  providence,  according  to  majesty  and  invisible 
|p;race ;  but  according  to  the  flesh  which  the  Word  assumed,  according  to 
that  which  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  ye  shall  not  have  me  ;  therefore, 
because  that  he  conversed  with  his  disciples  forty  days,  he  is  ascended  up 
into  heaven  and  is  not  here." — Tract  50  in  Joan.  Edit.  Basil.  1596. 

Yet  the  church  of  Rome  says,  that  the  body  of  Christ  is  od 
every  altar !     In  the  23d  epistle — 

"If  the  sacraments  (says  he)  had  not  some  resemblance  of  these  things 
whereof  they  are  sacraments,  they  would  not  be  sacraments  at  all ;  but  from 
tliis  resemblance  they  take  for  the  most  part  the  names  of  the  things  which 
they  represent ;  therefore,  as  the  sacrament  of  the  body  of  Christ  is  in  some 
manner  or  sense  Christ's  body,  and  the  sacrament  of  his  blood,  is  the  bloo«^ 
of  Christ,  so  the  sacrament  of  faith  (meaning  baptism)  is  faith."— 23d  Episf 
Tom.  ii,  p.  93. 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION.  225 

In  this  passage  St.  Augustin  shows  the  meaning  of  the  word* 
employed  to  designate  the  Eucharist,  and  explains  many  of  the 
strong  expressions  to  be  found  in  Mr.  Maguire's  quotation?. 

St.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  who  lived  in  the  second  century 

says, 

"Inasmuch  as  Christ  declared,  that  the  bread  which  I  give  you  is  my  f. esh, 
and  inasmuch  as  flesh  is  irrigated  by  blood,  therefore  the  wine  is  alleg  )ri- 
CALLY  CALLED  blood.— Psedag.  Lib.  i,  c.  6,  p.  104.  For  the  word  is  aile- 
GORiCALLT  DESIGNATED  by  many  different  names,  such  as  meat  and  flesh, 
and  nourishment,  and  bread,  and' blood,  and  milk ;  for  the  Lord  is  all  things 
for  the  enjoyment  of  us  who  have  believed  in  him.  Nor  let  any  one  think  we 
speak  strangely,  when  we  say  that  milk  is  allegoricallt  called  the  blood 
of  the  Lord,  for  is  not  wine  likewise  allkgorically  called  by  the  very 
same  appellation  ?" — Paedag.  lib.  i,  c.  6,  p.  105. 

Again, 

"  The  scripture,  then,  has  named  wine  a  mystic  symbol  of  the  holy  blood." 
—Ibid.  lib.  ii,  c.  2,  p.  156. 

Again, 

''Be  well  assured,  that  Christ  also  himself  partook  of  wine,  inasmuch  a< 
lie  also  was  a  man.     He  moreover  blessed  the  wine,  saying,  take,  drink 
this  is  my  blood,  the  blood  of  the  vine.     The  consecrated  liquor  of  exhilara 
tion,  tiieretore,  allegorically  represents  the  Word,  who  poured  himseb 
out  on  behalf  of  many  for  the  remission  of  sins." — Ibid.  lib.  ii,  c.  2,  p.  158. 

I  have  various  other  quotations  to  the  same  effect,  but  my 
time  is  too  precious  to  be  expended  in  reading  them  ;  you  can 
judge  whether  they  are  not  stronger  than  those  which  my  friend 
has  cited.  I  am  convinced  that  the  quotations  which  I  have 
read,  are  correctly  given.  My  opponent  has  doubted  that  pas- 
sage of  Pope  Gelasius : 

"  Certainly  the  sacraments  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  which  are 
received,  are  a  divine  thing,  because  by  these  we  are  made  partakers  of  the 
divine  nature  ;  nevertheless  the  substance  or  nature  of  the  bread  and  wine 
ceases  not  to  cxist^  and  assuredly  the  image  and  similitude  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ  are  celebrated  in  the  action  of  the  mystej-ies." — De  duab. 
Christi  J^atur.  Cont.  J^est.  et  Eutych.  in  BiUioth.  Patr.  vol.  iv,  p.  422. 

My  friend  tells  me  that  this  book  is  doubted ;  but  there  is 
stronger  reason  why  my  passages  should  be  genuine  than  his. 
Protestants  have  no  index  expurgatorius  to  which  the  Fathers 
must  be  subject — *'  Solius  est  Dei  adorari"  is  purged  by  that 
index  from  the  index  of  the  works  of  Athanasius  and  Augustin — 
and  if  a  doctrine  of  that  nature  could  be  purged,  is  there  any 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  passages  which  remain  untouched^  aie 
the  genuine  sentiments  of  their  originals..— Adorari  solius  Dei 
est :  (adoration  belongs  to  God  alone)  deleatur  ex.  ind.  oper. 
Athanasii  Indice  lib.  Prohib.  et  Expurg.  p.  52.  Madrit.  An. 
1627.     Item  ex  In.  Oper.  St.  August,  ibid.  p.  56. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  produced  passages  from  Luther.  I  ask  him 
in  the  face  of  the  world  to  produce  the  places  froni  which  they 


226    THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUESTANTIATION. 

are  taken.  They  carry  upon  the  face  of  them  their  own  refuta 
tion.  I  arn  satisfied  that  many  of  them  were  never  uttered  by 
that  eminent  and  intrepid  reformer,  the  great  and  mighty  Luther. 
As  to  the  hturgies  to  which  I  referred^  in  order  to  meet  my  oppG- 
nent  on  his  own  ground^  they  have  little  weight  with  me  ;  but 
they  show  the  opinions  of  the  individuals  who  used  them,  upon 
the  subject.  The  Greeks  gave,  I  imagine,  but  a  lame  and 
confused  account  of  them  at  the  council  of  Florence,  and  these 
liturgies  were  composed  one  thousand  years  before  that  council. 
If  transubstantiation,  which,  the  church  of  Rom.e  says,  takes 
place  as  soon  as  the  words  of  consecration  are  uttered,  was  held 
by  those  who  used  these  liturgies,  it  would  be  inconsistent,  that 
the  prayer  should  be  subsequent  to  the  words  of  consecration, 
and  that  even  after  consecration  they  should  continue  to  call  the 
elements  gifts,  I  admit,  that  the  expression  is  strong,  (but 
remember,  that  it  was  used  after  consecration)  namely,  that  God 
would  make  this  bread,  the  holy  body  of  Christ.  We  have 
learned  from  Augustin,  that  the  names  of  the  things  signified 
are  often  employed  instead  of  the  names  of  the  signs.  My 
friend  has  not  met  me  respecting  the  authors  of  the  mass  not 
believing  in  transubstantiation.  I  am  convinced  that  he  cannot 
controvert  my  proofs,  that  they  did  not  beheve  in  that  doctrine. 
To  proceed  with  my  arguments — I  have  shown  that  the  Saviour, 
even  in  the  very  place  which  describes  the  institution  of  the 
sacrament,  as  well  as  elsewhere,  employed  figurative  language. 
What  reason  have  we  for  thinking  that  there  is  not  figurative 
language  in  this  passage  also?  I  shall  assign  to  you  my  reasons 
for  believing  that  the  expression,  "  this  my  body,"  is  to  be  taken 
in  a  figurative  sense  also.  Our  Saviour  says,  "  do  this  for  a 
commemoration  of  me." — (Luke,  xxii,  19.)  I  ask,  if  the  real 
body  and  blood  of  Christ — if  Christ  himself,  be  substantially 
present,  how  the  Eucharist  can  be  observed  as  a  commemorative 
act?  The  commemoration  of  a  person  betokens  that  the  per- 
son commemorated  is  absent,  not  present.  "  As  often  as  ye  eat 
this  bread,  and  drink  the  chalice,  ye  shall  show  the  death  of  the 
Lord  till  he  come." — (1  Cor.  xi,  25.)  There  are  innumerable 
figurative  expressions  in  holy  writ.  "The  seven  full  ears  «r6 
seven  years  of  plenty,  the  seven  lean  kine  are  seven  years  of 
famine." — (Gen.  xli,  26,  27.)  "  The  seven  candlesticks  are  the 
fc^even  churches." — (Apoc.  i,  20.)  "  The  seven  heads  are  seven 
mountains." — (Apoc.  xvii,  9.)  In  the  passover  itself,  we  have 
the  expression,  "it  is  the  Lord's  passover,"  (Exod.  xii,  IL)  or 
as  the  Douay  version  renders  it,  "  it  is  the  phase  of  the  Lord." 
The  auxiliary  verb,  in  the  sense  of"  represent,"  is  usual  to  the 
sacred  writers.  Recollect  too,  that  the  words,  "  this  is  my 
body,"  were  addressed  to  Jews,  who  were  accustomed  to  this 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSI^BSTANTIATION.  227 

Style  of  language  at  the  feast  of  the  passover.  Justin  Martyr 
tells  us,  that  the  form  of  words,  used  at  the  passover  from  Ezra's 
time,  was,  "  this  passover  is  our  Saviour  and  our  refuge," — 
(Dial,  cum  Tryph.  p.  297.  Ed.  Paris,  1639.)— that  is,  this 
passover  represents  him,  who  is  our  Saviour  and  our  refuge. 
Bear  in  mind,  therefore,  that  our  Saviour  addressed  himself  to 
men  who  were  prepared  to  understand  him  in  a  figurative  sense. 
Further — the  Jews  were  forbidden  to  eat  blood  ;  (Lev.  xvii,  10, 
11,  12.)  would  not  the  feehngs  of  the  Apostles  have  been 
shocked,  if  they  believed  that  the  Saviour  had  commanded  them 
to  partake  of  it.  The  prohibition  was  not  subsequently  repealed ; 
for,  as  my  friend  has  observed,  the  council  of  Jerusalem,  as  he 
terms  it,  enforced  an  abstinence  from  blood.  Again,  if  the 
Saviour's  words  are  to  be  taken  literally,  they  would  do  away 
with  the  nature  of  a  sacrament,  and  contradict  the  prophecy 
which  says,  "  Thou  wilt  not  suffer  thy  Holy  One  to  see  corrup- 
tion."— Psalm  XV,  10. 

Sacred  Writ  says,  that  the  body  of  Christ  shall  not  see  corrup- 
tion :  but  the  elements,  even  after  consecration,  are  corruptible  ; 
therefore,  we  argue,  that  they  cannot  have  been  transubstantiated 
into  that  body,  which  does  not  see  corruption.  Mark  the  con- 
sequence of  rejecting  the  testimony  of  sense  :  that  which  proves 
the  truth  of  Christ's  resurrection,  proves  the  falsehood  of  tran- 
substantiation ;  but  if  the  testimony  of  sense  is  to  be  refused, 
then  we  weaken  the  evidence  for  the  Christian  revelation.  St. 
John,  in  his  first  epistle,  first  chap,  says, 

"That  which  we  have  heard,  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  which  we 
Iiave  looked  upon,  and  which  our  hands  have  handled,,  of  the  word  of  Life ; 
for  the  hfe  was  manifested:  and  we  have  seen  and  do  bear  witness,  and 
declare  unto  you  the  life  eternal,  which  was  with  the  Father,  and  hath  appeared 
to  us:  that  which  we  have  seen  and  have  heard,  we  declare  unto  you,  that 
you  also  may  have  fellowship  with  us,  and  our  fellowship  may  be  with  the 
Father  and  with  his  Son  Jesus  Christ" 

When  Thomas  doubted,  the  Saviour  said  to  him, 

"  Put  in  thy  finger  hither,  and  see  my  hands,  and  bring  hither  thy  hand, 
and  put  it  into  my  side ;  and  be  not  faithless  but  believing." — John,  xx,  27. 

The  Saviour,  'tis  true,  added,  "  Blessed  are  they  that  have 
not  seen,  and  yet  have  believed."  But  he  did  not  say,  *'  Blessed 
are  those  who  have  seen^  and  yet  have  not  believed  ;"  the  blessing 
v/as  not  to  those,  who  having  the  opportunity  of  seeing,  disre- 
garded the  testimony  of  their  senses,  but  to  those  who  not  seeing, 
yet  believed — who,  when  the  evidence  of  sense  was  wanting, 
yet  believed.  I  would  ask,  what  is  the  use  of  this  irrational  and 
extraordinary  doctrine  1  I  will  tell  you — to  make  demi-gods  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  priests — to  raise  them  in  the  estimation  of 
the  i>eople,  and  to  cause  the  multitude  to  look  up  to  thom  as  men 


2f8  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

who  C'Jin  create  their  God.  In  the  dark  ages,  an  account  of 
which  I  read  to  you,  when  the  priests  domineered  over  the 
intellects  of  men,  when  abuses  and  fictions  were  introduced,  was 
this  monstrous  doctrine  established.  You  have  heard  the  story 
of  the  mule — the  heretic  was  convinced — he  exercised  his  senses 
on  the  miracle.  Now,  if  he  exercised  his  senses  on  the  miracle, 
why  should  he  not  have  exercised  them  on  transubstantiation 
itself?  Permit  me  also  to  add,  that  the  Saviour  most  probably 
spoke  in  the  Syriac  language — and,  as  in  that  tongue  there  is 
no  word  signifying  "  to  represent,"  was  under  the  necessity  of 
employing  the  auxiliary  verb.  I  now  call  upon  Mr.  Maguire  to 
meet  me  upon  the  question  like  a  man,  and  not  to  beat  about 
the  bush — to  use  a  vulgar  phrase. 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  hope,  gentlemen,  you  wish  to  hear  more 
than  one  side  of  the  question ;  if  you  are  sincerely  anxious  to 
know  the  truth,  you  will  hear  both  with  equal  attention.  My 
friend  has  called  upon  me  to  follow  him  step  by  step,  I  thought 
my  forte  throughout  this  discussion  was  the  use  of  argument,  and 
from  the  first  day  up  to  this  moment,  I  could  never  keep  my 
friend  from  preaching  sermons,  and  confine  him  to  the  question 
at  issue.  He  denies  that  any  parallelism  exists  in  the  cases  of 
the  mysteries  of  the  Incarnation,  the  Trinity,  and  Transubstan- 
tiation. But  he  there  calculates  without  his  host — has  he 
attempted  to  show  that  these  doctrines  are  not  mysteries?  Has 
he  quoted  texts  of  scripture  against  me,  as  I  have  against  him  ? 
Has  he  brought  forward  a  single  direct  text  from  scripture 
against  me  ?  One  thing  is  clear,  by  rejecting  transubstantiation, 
because  it  is  a  mystery,  this  gentleman  overturns  all  mysteries, 
and  is  become  a  professed  Socinian.  He  has  quoted  the  evi- 
dence of  the  senses  against  transubstantiation.  But  even  if  tha^ 
doctrine  contradicted  the  senses,  he  should  recollect  that  the 
senses  have  nothing  to  do  with  regard  to  a  mystery.  St.  Paul 
says,  "  Faith  then  cometh  by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word 
of  Christ."  I  call  on  Mr.  Pope  to  prove  that  transubstantiation 
is  not  a  mystery — I  call  upon  him  to  show,  that  we  are  not  to 
believe  the  doctrine  because  it  appears  opposed  to  the  evidence 
of  some  of  the  senses,  though  we  are  told  that  "  faith  cometh 
by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of  Christ."  We  fmd  that 
St.  Paul  here  excludes  all  the  senses  as  judges  of  mysteries, 
save  the  sense  of  hearing  only.  If  the  senses  be  not  constituted 
as  the  proper  judges  of  mysteries  to  pronounce  upon  their  truth, 
then  all  his  reasoning  as  to  the  evidence  of  the  senses  falls  to 
the  ground.  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  brings  forward  arguments 
to  shew,  that  the  evidence  of  the  senses  may  be  contradicted  in 
a  mystery,  and  I  have  quoted  St.  Augusiin,  where  that  holy 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    229 

Father  says,  that  "  Christ  held  his  body  in  his  own  hands."  It 
was  absurd,  then,  on  the  part  of  my  opponent,  to  press  St.  Au- 
gustin  into  an  opposition  to  this  doctrine.  He  has  enlarged  upon 
the  senses  as  the  bulwark  of  our  faith.  The  senses  often  contra- 
dict themselves — or  rather  contradict  facts  ;  thus,  Joshua  seeing 
an  angel,  mistook  him  for  a  man.  The  woman  at  the  sepulchre 
saw  two  young  men  at  the  tomb,  and  yet  the  scnpf^re  tells  us 
they  were  angels,  and  God  appeared  in  the  form  of  man,  and 
yet  was  taken  for  a  mere  man.  Here,  then,  the  senses  contra- 
dicted themselves.  Again,  if  you  immerse  a  straight  stick  in 
water,  you  would  almost  swear,  were  you  to  believe  your  sight, 
that  the  stick  was  crooked.  In  natural  things  it  is  very  common 
to  see  the  senses  contradicted.  In  the  strict  sense  of  the  word, 
it  is  true  they  are  not  contradicted,  for  it  is  not  the  business  of 
the  senses  to  pronounce  judgment  according  to  the  principles 
of  philosophy ;  they  are  to  convey  the  impressions  made  upon 
them  to  the  mind — to  relate  merely  what  appears  to  them.  In 
respect  to  the  angel  and  the  stick,  they  merely  relate  to  the 
mind  what  appears  as  a  fact  to  them.  When  a  man  sees  what 
is  called  a  wafer,  he  tastes  and  smells  it ;  and  here  I  grant  these 
senses  contradict  his  faith.  But  to  the  senses  we  oppose  the 
express  promises  of  Christ,  and  believe  with  St.  Paul  that  faith 
Cometh  by  hearing ;  and  that  our  Lord  bequeathed  to  man,  as  a 
test  of  his  love,  a  most  extraordinary  but  mysterious  legacy.  As 
Mr.  Pope  argues  that  the  testimony  of  the  senses  is  fatal  to 
transubstantiation,  it  remains  for  him  to  show,  either  that  it  is 
not  a  mystery,  or  that  faith  cometh  not  by  hearing,  for  no  sense 
is  allowed  to  judge  of  mysteries,  but  the  sense  of  hearing.  Christ 
said,  "  this  is  my  body."  The  Apostles  heard  the  words  pro- 
nounced, and  their  sense  of  hearing  was  the  only  judge.  We 
have  it  upon  their  testimony,  that  Christ  spake  the  words,  con- 
sequently our  faith  must  come  from  hearing.  How  will  my 
friend  prove  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity?  It  contradicts  all  the 
senses,  save  that  of  hearing,  so  does  the  doctrine  of  the  Incar- 
nation. If  that  be  the  case,  if  angels  be  taken  for  men,  and  that 
the  senses  are  thus  led  astray,  it  is  absurd  to  say  that  a  mystery 
is  not  to  be  believed,  because  it  contradicts  the  senses.  Mr. 
Pope  has  recurred  to  Melchisedech.  I  challenged  him  to  show 
that  Melchisedech  ever  offered  up  sacrifice  but  on  one  occasion, 
and  yet  he  is  called  a  priest  of  the  Most  High.  And  Christ  is 
called  by  the  royal  prophet  -md  by  the  Apostle  Paul,  **  a  priest 
for  ever  according  to  the  order  of  Melchisedech."  Melchisedech 
could  not  be  a  priest  without  offering  up  a  sacrifice.  This  he 
did  when  he  offered  the  bread  and  wine  ;  why  were  they  intro- 
duced ]  Evidently  to  show  that  he  made  an  offering.  Jerome's 
testimony  on  this  matter  is  preferable  to  that  of  Mr.  Pope.     I 

20 


230  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBST  A.NTIAT10N. 

care  uoi  for  the  Hebrew  originals,  as  they  are  called.  It  ifS 
admitted  by  two  Protestant  divines,  Doctors  Wall  and  Mills, 
that  the  old  Itahan  version  is  the  purest  copy  extant  of  the  Bible 
I  have  all  the  Lutheran  churches  against  Mr.  Pope  on  this 
matter,  and  all  the  heretics  till  the  days  of  Berengarius.  He 
first  denied  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  ;  but  he  died  a 
convert,  and  was  heartily  sorry  for  his  fatal  error.  After  him, 
it  is  an  admitted  fact,  that  Zninglius,  in  his  comment  on  the 
words,  *»  Hoc  est  corpus  meum,"  substituted  the  verb  "  repre- 
icniaV^  for  the  verb  '' e^/,'*  so  that  the  sense  would  run,  "  This 
represents  my  body."  And  this  doctrine  he  confesses  to  have 
received  from  a  spectre  ;  but  he  adds,  "  Nescio  an  albo,  an 
nigro,"  "  I  know  not  whether  it  was  hlack  or  white."  Luther, 
vn  the  most  ferocious  manner,  attacked  Calvin  on  the  subject. 
He  maintained  the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence  against  Calvin 
and  Zuinglius ;  he  defied  them,  as  I  have  defied  my  friend,  to 
disprove  that  doctrine  by  arguments  drawn  from  scripture  ;  he 
describes  them  as  differing  from  all  the  churches  in  the  world, 
and  tVom  the  Lutheran  churches  in  particular. 

]My  friend  has  introduced  the  marriage  at  Cana  in  Gallilee,  to 
show  that  there  the  transubstantiation  was  made  palpable  to  the 
senses.  I  am  sorry  to  perceive,  that  he  is  unable  to  distinguish 
between  the  nature  of  a  mystery  and  a  miracle.  Because  Christ 
perlbrmed  a  miracle,  of  which  the  senses  were  able  to  judge,  of 
course  it  follows,  that  the  senses  are  able  to  pronounce  upon  a 
mystery.  Oh!  profound  argument — oh!  noble  logician.  Do 
the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  of  the  Incarnation  fall  under  the 
judgment  of  the  senses  ?  If  Christ  performed  miracles  to  con- 
vert the  Jews  and  Pagans,  it  must  therefore  follow,  according  to 
Mr.  Pope,  that  all  mysteries  are  false.  If  the  Incarnation  and 
the  Trinity  are  to  be  brought  under  the  cognizance  of  the  senses, 
then  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  must  be  rejected,  for  it  never 
can  be  understood  by  man,  nor  can  the  senses  reconcile  it  with 
the  divine  goodness  and  mercy.  I  introduced  the  marriage  at 
Cana,  to  show  that  it  is  not  incompatible  with  Chris fs  power  to 
work  the  miracle  of  transubstantiation,  because,  in  one  of  his  first 
miracles,  he  changed  water  into  wine,  which  was  purely  a  tran- 
substantiation. But  I  never  introduced  that  miracle  directly  to 
prove  that  he  instituted  the  mystery  of  transubstantiation  at  his 
last  supper. 

It  is  a  principle  in  logics  that  comparisons  are  not  to  hold 
throughout  all  their  bearings.  As  to  the  passage  from  Gelasius, 
It  remains  for  Mr.  Pope  to  prove  it  genuine.  Hawarden  has 
already  answered,  that  it  is  doubted  amongst  critics  whether  this 
.work  was  written  by  Pope  Gelasius,  or  by  Gelasius  Cyzinicus, 
the  author  of  a  book  "  De  duabus  Christi  Naturis."    The  writer 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION.  231 

of  this  book,  whoever  he  was,  observes,  that  because  appear- 
ances or  accidents  continue  after  consecration,  we  must  carefully 
distinguish  between  the  appearances  and  the  reality,  viz. — the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ.     His  words  are — 

"  Et  tamen  esse  non  desinit  substanta  vel  natura  panis  et  vini." 

"  And  yet  the  substance  or  nature  of  bread  and  wine  does  not  cease." 

Those  words  are  quite  reconcileable  with  orthodox  doctrine, 
for  the  substance  or  nature  of  bread  and  wine  remains  after  con- 
secration, as  far  as  the  senses  are  concerned.  And  that  this  was 
the  meaning  of  Pope  Gelasius,  (supposing  him  to  have  been  the 
author)  is  pretty  clear,  from  his  using  the  disjunctive  preposition 
»*  vel,"  *'  or,"  which  certainly  qualifies  the  apparent  harshness 
of  the  sentence.  The  words  substance  and  nature  are  not  always 
used  to  express  the  essential  properties  of  a  subject — substance 
is  one  thing — and  the  nature  of  a  substance  another.  Thus  a 
stone  is  a  substance,  and  so  is  iron  but  the  hardness  of  the  stone 
and  the  hardness  of  iron  is  the  nature  of  the  substance.  Let 
any  man  examine  the  work  itself,  and  he  will  find  that  there  is 
nothing  in  those  words  inconsistent  with  the  doctrine  of  transub- 
otantiation. 

My  opponent  has  accused  me  of  misquoting.  Tt  shall  appear 
^o  the  world  which  of  us  has  been  convicted  of  misquotations. 
As  soon  as  this  discussion  has  terminated,  and  the  report  of  it 
is  published,  I  shall  certainly  go  to  Manchester  library,  and  con- 
sult the  editions  of  the  Fathers  preserved  there.  Although  my 
friend  has  Trinity  College  at  his  back,  with  all  its  fellows  to 
assist  him,  it  shall  then  be  made  manifest,  who  was  the  more 
correct  in  quoting  from  the  Fathers.  This  gentleman  would 
make  transubstantiation  appear  a  foolish  doctrine,  because  Christ 
should  be  present  in  so  many  places  at  once.  My  opponent  is 
truly  a  wonderful  philosopher.  May  I  ask  him,  can  he  describe 
the  properties  of  a  spiritualized  and  purified  body  ?  The  body 
of  our  Saviour,  after  his  resurrection  passed  through  the  pores 
of  a  door.  Is  not  that  inexplicable  1  I  should  be  happy  to  hear 
Mr.  Pope  describe  the  properties  of  a  body  spiritualized  and  of 
a  spirit.  The  Devil  himself  can  be  present  in  many  places  at 
once — otherwise  he  could  not  tempt  mankind.  According  t€ 
my  principles,  and  those  of  every  Catholic,  it  is  blasphemy  to 
call  in  doubt  the  omnipresence  of  Christ.  And  will  those  who 
pretend  to  venerate  the  Saviour  so  much,  presume  to  call  it  in 
question  1  If  Christ's  humanity  be  hypostatically  united  to  his 
divinity,  does  not  he  who  circumscribes  the  one,  by  implication 
circumscribe  the  other  ?  My  friend  doubts  the  passages  which 
I  have  quoted  from  Luther,  1  have  here  600  passages  more  from 
him,  which  i  espect  for  the  present  assembly  prevents  me  from 


232         THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

quoting  now — T  have  the  book  here — I  can  prove  the  authenti- 
city and  genuineness  of  the  text — I  will  publish  my  quotations 
in  the  report  of  the  present  proceedings — then  let  the  fellows  of 
Trinity  College  convict  me,  if  they  can,  of  false  quotations.. 
My  friend  has  quoted  the  words  "  Do  this  in  remembrance  of 
me."     The  following  is  the  language  of  the  Latin  Yulgate  : 

"  Hoc  facile  in  meam  commemoration  em."  "  Do  this  in  remembrance 
of  me." 

St.  Paul  in  the  11th  chapter  of  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians, explains  the  above  thus  : 

"  Gluoties  cunque  enim,  manducabitis  panem  hunc  et  calicem  bibetis  mor- 
tem domini  anunciabitis,  donee  veniat" — "  For  as  often  as  you  shall  eat  this 
bread,  and  drink  this  chalice,  you  shall  show  forth  the  death  of  the  Lord  until 
he  come." 

St.  Paul  clearly  explains  what  our  Lord  meant  by  the  words, 
**  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me," — that  is,  as  often  as  you  do 
this,  you  will  commemorate  my  death  and  passion.  The  reality, 
therefore,  of  Christ's  presence  in  th€  sacrament  of  the  altar,  by 
no  means  excludes  the  idea  of  a  commemoration,  for  although 
the  present  sacrifice  be  truly  a  sacrifice,  yet  as  it  is  not  a  bloody 
sacrifice,  it  may  be  justly  entitled  a  commemoration  of  the  bloody 
one  on  the  cross.  The  unbloody  sacrifice  of  the  mass  is  the 
remembrance  of  the  death  and  passion  of  Christ,  and  as  often 
as  it  is  celebrated  the  death  and  passion  of  our  Lord  are  shown 
forth  until  he  come.  Christ,  therefore,  was  justified  in  calling  it 
in  that  sense  a  remembrance,  though  in  the  other  sense  he  is 
really  present,  and  is  really  offereo  up.  But  my  friend  has 
endeavoured  to  confuse  with  figurative  expressions  the  immu- 
table words  of  scripture.  He  would  leave  nothing  clear  or 
certain  in  the  Bible.  Every  thing  according  to  him  is  to  be 
taken  in  a  metaphorical  sense.  Should  I  attempt  to  do  so,  he 
would  insist  on  holding  me  to  the  precise  terms  of  the  text,  and 
when  I  endeavour  to  confine  him  to  the  strict  meaning,  he  has 
recourse  to  tropes  and  metaphors.  It  is  impossible  in  such  a 
way,  to  prove  the  falsehood  of  a  doctrine  which  has  been  held  in 
the  church  for  1800  years.  The  Arian^,  the  Manicheans,  the 
Eutychians,  and  all  such  noted  heretics,  never  denied  the  real 
presence  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar. 

My  friend  has  quoted  the  liturgies.  I  have  them  here  as 
translated  by  Dr.  Brett,  a  Protestant,  and  no  friend  to  the  Cath- 
olics, and  they  all  prove  transubstantiation.  Mr.  Pope  has  called 
the  Lord's  passover  the  type  of  Christ.  It  is  admitted  on  all 
hands,  that  it  was  the  type  of  Christ's  body.  Ought  not  the 
thing  typified  exceed  in  substance  and  reality  the  type  1  There 
was  real  blood  in  the  passover.  The  blood  of  the  lamb  was 
spilled  at  the  doors,  and  it  was  a  type  of  the  blood  of  Christ. 


THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSLTJBSTANTIATION.         233 

If  the  type  was  the  real  blood  of  the  animal,  of  course  that  is 
more  important  which  is  the  antitype — namely,  the  real  blood  of 
Christ — the  type  is  itself  the  confirmation  of  the  thing  typified. 

The  Jews  were  told,  "  eat  not  blood."  I  ask  any  man  pos- 
sessed of  common  sense,  if  the  eating  of  that  which  is  apparently 
bread  and  wine,  is  to  be  considered  in  the  same  light  as  the 
eating  of  animal  blood  '?  The  Apostle  has  been  quoted,  and  1 
FAever  heard  a  more  wilful  misinterpretation  of  scripture.  The 
command  of  the  Apostles  applied  to  that  only  which  had  all  the 
natural  appearances  of  blood.  They  gave  an  express  com- 
mandment not  to  eat  it,  and  I  therefore  called  on  Mr.  Pope  to 
show  by  what  authority  he  was  permitted  to  take  gravy.  I  called 
upon  him  to  prove  from  the  Bible  by  what  authority  the  sign  of 
the  cross  is  made  in  baptism — to  prove  from  the  Bible  the  pro- 
cession of  the  Holy  Ghost — to  show  why  he  neglected  to  wash 
his  neighbor's  feet,  in  contradiction  to  our  Saviour's  command, 
and  why  he  did  not  observe  the  Jewish  sabbath.  From  a  notice 
of  all  those  questions  he  has  prudently  abstained.  You,  gentle- 
men, will  estimate  the  value  of  such  prudence. 

But  Mr.  Pope  says,  that  the  body  of  Christ  will  never  see 
corruption.  He  should  prove,  that  when  the  species  begin  to 
decay,  Christ  could  not  extricate  himself  and  ascended  to  his 
heavenly  Father.  Are  the  rays  of  the  sun  polluted  by  passing 
through  an  unclean  medium  1  If  that  be  so  in  the  natural  world 
It  is  foolish  to  think  that  Christ  could  be  contaminated  by  contact 
with  corruptible  matter.  Mr.  Pope  has  quite  established  the 
Socinian  system  by  his  arguments.  The  Socinian  admits  no 
principle  but  reason  as  his  guide — neither  does  Mr.  Pope.  The 
Socinian  will  only  interpret  the  sacred  scriptures  according  to 
his  private  judgment.  Mr  Pope  coincides  with  him  fully  on 
that  point.  The  Socinian  rejects  transubstantiation,  and  all 
mysteries,  as  contrary  to  reason.  Will  Mr.  Pope  go  that  length  ? 
His  arguments  certainly  tend  thereto.  Now,  I  can  prove  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence  was  not  alone  retained  by 
Luther,  but  that  the  doctrine  was  retained  in  the  church  of  Eng- 
land until  she  became  Calvinistical.  Mr.  Pope's  arguments 
would  go  to  show  that  no  preparation  was  necessary  for  the 
receiving  of  the  sacrament  in  the  church  of  England — that  no 
moral  change  was  required,  and  that  only  a  bit  of  bread  and 
wine,  instead  of  the  body  of  Christ,  were  received  in  the  com- 
munion. Bishop  Andrews,  in  the  time  of  James  the  first,  in 
his  answer  to  Bellarmine,  admits  that  Chrst  is  present  in  the 
sacrament  of  the  altar  ;  and  he  adds  : 

"  I  also  with  St.  Ambrose  adore  the  flesh  of  Christ  in  the  mysteries." 

Bishop  Forbes,  De  Eucharistia,  Lib.  ii.  Cap.  2,  has  the 
following  remarkable  passage  : 

20* 


254         THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

^*  The  sounder  Protestants  make  no  doubt  of  adoring  Christ  in  the  Eu- 
charist." 

And, 

"  It  is  a  monstrous  error,"  says  he,  "  of  the  rigid  Protestants  (Calvinists) 
who  deny  that  Christ  is  to  be  adored  in  the  Eucharist,  except  only  with 
an  inward  adoration  of  the  mind,  but  not  with  any  outward  act  of  adoration, 
as  kneehng,  or  other  hke  posture  of  the  body.  These  people  commonly 
haTe  not  a  right  belief  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament,  in  which  he  is  present  after 
a  wonderful  but  real  manner." 

Thorndyke  says,  in  lib.  iii,  cap.  30,  page  360 — 

"  I  suppose  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  may  be  adored  wheresoever  they 
are ;  and  muit  be  adored  by  a  good  Christian,  where  the  custom  of  the  church 
which  a  Christian  is  obliged  to  communicate  with,  requires  it.  And  is  not 
the  presence  thereof  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  a  just  occasion  pre 
Bently  to  express,  by  that  bodily  act  of  adoration,  that  inward  honour,  which 
wc  always  carry  towards  our  Lord  Christ  as  God  ?" 

And, 

"  Not  to  baulk  that  freedom,  (says  he)  which  hath  carried  me  to  publish  all 
this,  I  do  believe,  that  it  was  so  practised  and  done  in  the  ancient  church, 
and  in  the  symbols  before  receiving." 

Dr.  Cosin,  in  stating  the  doctrines  of  the  church  of  England, 
says  : 

"  That  God's  omnipotency  can  change  one  substance  into  another,  none 
will  deny  ;  and  we  see  it  done  by  Christ  in  the  town  of  Galiilee,  when  he 
changed  the  water  into  wine,  and  it  was  a  true  and  proper  transubstantiation. 
We  do  not  say  that  God  is  not  able  to  make  the  body  of  Christ  present,  and 
truly  give  it  in  the  sacrament,  whilst  the  substance  of  the  bread  remains. 
We  believe  a  presence  and  union  of  Christ  with  our  soul  and  body,  which 
we  know  not  how  to  call  better  than  sacramental ;  that  is  effected  by  eating  ; 
that  while  we  eat  and  drink  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine,  we  eat  and  drink 
therewithal  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  not  in  a  corporeal  manner,  but  some 
other  way,  incomprehensible,  known  only  to  God,  which  we  call  spiritual. 
We  confess  with  the  Fathers  that  this  manner  of  presence  is  unaccountable 
and  past  finding  out ;  not  to  be  searched  and  pried  into  by  reason,  but  be- 
lieved by  faith.  For  it  is  more  acceptable  to  God,  with  an  humble  simplicity 
of  faith  to  reverence  and  embrace  the  words  of  Christ  (this  is  my  body,)  than 
to  wrest  them  violently  to  a  strange  and  improper  sense,  or  to  determine  what 
exceeds  the  capacity  of  men  and  angels.  We  do  not  find  fault  with  a  general 
explication  of  the  manner.  We  confess  the  necessity  of  a  supernatural  and 
heavenly  change,  and  that  the  signs  cannot  become  sacraments  but  by  the 
infinite  power  of  God.  The  bread,  as  I  have  often  said,  does  not  only  repre- 
sent the  body  of  our  Lord,  but  also,  being  received,  we  are  truly  made  parta- 
kers of  that  precious  body  ;  for  so  saith  St.  Jerome,  *  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  is  made  at  the  prayer  of  the  priest ;  that  is,  the  elements  so  qualified, 
that  being  received,  it  becomes  the  communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  which  it  could  not  without  the  nreceding  prayers.  And  if  it  seem 
impossible  that  the  flesh  of  Christ  should  descend,  and  come  to  be  our  food 
through  so  great  a  distance,  we  must  remember  how  much  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  exceeds  our  sense  and  our  apprehensions,  and  how  absurd  it  would 
be  to  undertake  to  measure  his  immensity  by  our  weakness  and  narrow  capa- 
city, and  so  make  our  lUith  to  conceive  and  believe  what  our  reason  cannot 
comprehend.  Yet  our  faith  doth  not  cause,  or  make  that  presence,  but  appre- 
hends it  as  most  truly  and  really  effected  by  the  word  of  Christ.  The  faith 
whereby  we  are  said  to  eat  the  flesh  of  Christ,  is  not  that  only  whereby  we 
b«!ieve  that  he  died  for  our  sina,  for  this  faith  is  required  and  supposed  to 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.     235 

precede  the  sacramental  manducation ;  but  more  properly  that  whereby  we 
oelieve  those  words  of  Christ,  'this  is  my  body.'  For  in  this  mystical  eating 
by  the  wonderful  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  we  do  invisibly  receive  the 
substance  of  ChrisVs  body  and  blood,  as  much  as  if  we  should  eat  and  drink 
them  both  visibly.  It  remains  that  we  should  with  faith  and  humility  admire 
this  high  and  sacred  mystery,  which  our  tongue  cannot  sufficiently  explain, 
nor  our  heart  conceive.  The  presence  of  Christ  in  this  mystery  is  not  opposed 
to  distance  but  to  absence,  which  only  could  deprive  us  of  the  benefit  and 
fruition  of  the  object.  As  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  conveyed  by  thig 
sacrament  to  the  v/orthy  receiver,  so  they  are  offered  by  it  to  all,  that  is  truly 
really,  and  substantially." — {See  Dr.  Cosines  History  of  Transubstantiation 
Anno.  1676,  pages  117,  55,  2,  44,  34,  et  alibi  passim.) 

What  says  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  sanctioned  by  Queen 
Elizabeth,  on  this  subject — 

"  Grant  us  so  to  eat  the  flesh  of  thy  dear  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  drink 
liis  blood,  that  our  sinful  bpdies  may  be  made  clean  by  his  body." 

And,  in  giving  the  sacrament : — 

"  The  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  was  given  for  thee,  preserve 
thy  body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life.  The  bloodof  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
which  was  shed  for  thee,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life." 

Mr.  Pope. — Mr.  Maguire,  in  several  of  his  arguments,  has 
taken  it  for  granted,  that  I  allowed  the  doctrine  of  transubstan- 
tiation to  be  revealed  in  the  sacred  volume.  I  need  scarcely 
remark,  that  I  have  made  no  such  concession.  Inasmuch  as  the 
mystery  of  the  Trinity  does  not  come  under  the  cognizance  of 
our  senses,  they  being  incapable  of  exercising  their  powers  upon 
the  nature  of  the  Deity,  no  parallel  can  be  instituted  between  it 
and  transubstantiation.  Strange  to  say,  my  friend  has  observed, 
that  I  have  become  a  Socinian.  My  letter  is  before  the  pubHc 
containing  proofs  of  the  essential  Godhead  of  Christ.  I  fling 
from  me,  therefore,  such  a  charge — shall  I  say,  with  indignation. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  observed,  that  if  transubstantiation  be  a 
mystery,  its  being  opposed  to  the  evidence  of  our  senses  should 
not  stand  in  the  way  of  its  reception.  The  observation  which  I 
made  in  the  commencement  of  this  speech,  will  meet  this  posi- 
tion. Transubstantiation,  if  revealed,  would  indeed  be  a  mys- 
tery ;  but  I  beg  to  assert,  that  it  is  not  revealed  ;  it  is  opposed 
to  sense  and  reason,  and  is  repugnant  to  the  entire  tenour  of 
scripture. 

My  friend  has  observed,  that  the  senses  sometimes  contradict 
themselves,  and  instanced  the  cases  of  Joshua,  and  of  the  woman 
at  the  sepulchre,  who  supposed  that  the  angels  who  appeared  to 
them,  were  men.  The  onus  is  on  Mr.  Maguire  to  prove,  that 
the  angels  presented  themselves  clothed  with  all  the  effulgence 
of  celestial  glory.  No — they  came  in  the  habit  and  form  of 
men  ;  and  the  senses  so  far  gave  a  correct  testimony. 

Mr.   Maguire  has  spoken  of  a  stick  appearing  crooked  in 


)836    THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION, 

water.     I  reply  that  the  sense  of  touch  would  rectify  that  fala 
testimony,  as  that  sense  would  discover  the  stick  to  be  straight 
Mr.  Maguire  has  justly  observed,  that  the  senses  convey  the\ 
testimony  to  the  mind  and  judgment.     That  testimony,  I  beg  tt 
observe,  directly  refutes  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.    Tht 
senses  bearing  witness  that  the  bread  is  bread,  and  the  wine  h 
wine,  the  judgment  pronounces  correctly  that  the  bread  is  breau 
and  the  wine  is  wine.      Permit  me  also  to  add,  that  it  scarcely 
ever  happens,  that  all  the  senses  are  deceived  at  the  same  time  ; 
one  sense  may  be  deceived,  but  that  is  soon  corrected  by  the 
exercise  of  some  other. 

Mr.  Maguire  reminds  us,  that  "  faith  cometh  by  hearing." 
Faith  cometh  by  reading  too.  How  am  I  to  know,  that  the  words, 
"  this  is  my  body,"  are  in  the  scriptures,  if  I  do  not  exercise  my 
senses  ?  But  ii^  I  am  not  to  exercise  my  senses  upon  the 
elements,  perhaps  my  senses  altogether  deceive  me,  when  they 
inform  me  that  the  words,  "  this  is  my  body,"  are  contained  in 
the  sjxcred  records  !  The  doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  of  the 
Incarnation  are  above  sen?e.  Man  is  incompetent  to  discover 
the  modus  of  God's  existence,  or  to  explain  hoio  the  Deity  took 
upon  him  human  flesh ;  but  the  senses  of  the  wise  men  did  not 
deceive  them,  when  they  saw  an  infant  lying  in  the  stable  at 
Bethlehem. 

My  friend  has  rung  changes  on  the  priesthood  of  Melchise 
dech.  He  was  a  priest — but  I  have  shown  that  he  did  not  offer 
up  bread  and  wine  to  God,  but  brought  it  forth  for  the  refresh" 
merit  of  Abraham  and  his  follov)ers  ; — his  blessing  Abraham 
marked  out  his  sacerdotal  character.  In  the  7th  chapter  of 
Hebrews,  Douay  Bible,  there  is  no  mention  made  of  Melchise- 
dech  having  brought  out  bread  and  wine  ;  it  is  simply  said,  that 
"  he  blessed  Abraham." 

My  friend  informed  us,  that  he  thought  nothing  of  the  scrip- 
tures in  the  original  tongues  ;  yet  he  has  told  us,  that  his  church 
will  allow  them  to  be  read  in  the  originals.  Must  every  old 
woman  and  every  child  apply  themselves  to  the  study  of  Greek 
and  Hebrew  ?  Mr.  Maguire  has  observed,  that  the  Italian  Bible 
is  more  perfect  than  the  Vulgate.  The  Trent  doctors  ought  to 
be  much  obliged  to  him  for  this  discovery.  Bellarmine  indeed 
informs  us,  that  the  Fathers  teach  every  where,  that  the  Latin  edi- 
tion of  the  gospel  is  to  be  called  back  to  the  Greek  fountains,  and 
that  the  Latin  edition  of  the  Old  Testament  is  to  be  amended  by 
the  Hebrew.  Some,  'tis  true,  asserted,  when  they  saw  the  Latin 
vulgate  printed  between  the  Greek  and  Hebrew,  on  the  same 
page,  that  the  position  of  the  Latin  resembled  that  of  the  Saviour, 
when  he  was  crucified  between  two  thieves. — {Simon  Grit,  t.  Vt 
lib.  2,  14.) 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    237 

But  T  must  not  forget  that  Berengarius,  according  to  Mr 
Maguire,  was  the  first  who  denied  the  doctrine  of  transubstanti- 
ation.  We  shall  see  whether  this  assertion  is  correct.  My 
opponent  informs  us,  that  even  the  heretics  believed  in  the  doc- 
trine of  transubstantiation.  I  go  farther — T  imagine  that  tran- 
substantiation  is  of  heretical  origin,  and  I  now  trace  it  up  to 
Eutyches.  In  the  second  Dialogue  of  Theodoret,  between  an 
orthodox  Christian,  under  the  name  of  Orthodoxus,  and  a  heretici 
under  the  name  of  Eranistes  ;  the  latter  maintaining,  that  the 
humanity  of  Christ  was  changed  into  the  substance  of  the 
Divinity,  thus  illustrates  the  matter  : — 

"  As  (says  Eranistes)  the  symbols  of  the  Lord's  body  and  blood  are  one 
thing  hefore  the  invocation  of  the  priest,  but  after  the  invocation,  are  changed 
and  become  another  thing,  so  the  body  of  our  Lord,  after  his  ascension,  ia 
changed  into  the  divine  substance." 

Such  was  the  opinion  of  Eutyches  and  his  followers.  I  shall 
not  mutilate  the  passage  in  reply, though  I  admit,  that  the  language 
in  the  latter  part  of  it  is  strong. 

"  Thou  art  (says  Orthodoxus)  caught  in  thine  own  net ;  because  the  mys- 
tical symbols  after  consecration  do  not  pass  out  op  their  own  nature, 

FOR  THEY  remain  IN  THEIR  FORMER  SUBSTANCE,  FIGURE,  AND  APPEAR- 
ANCE,and  may  be  seen  and  handled,  even  as  before  consecration  ;  but  they 
are  understood  to  be  what  they  become,  and  they  are  venerated  as  being  those 
things,  which  they  are  believed  to  be.  Compare,  therefore,  the  image  with 
•the  archetype,  and  you  will  perceive  the  resemblance^  for  the  type  must  needs 
be  similar  to  the  truth."— (Dial. 2,  Oper.  vol.  iv,  p.  84,  85,  Lutet.  Paris,  1642.) 

I  ask,  did  not  Theodoret  oppose  the  doctrine  of  transubstan- 
tiation, when  he  calls  the  Sacrament  an  image  ?  He  lived  in 
^c  fifth  century.  Again,  Pope  Gelasius,  as  you  have  seen,  also 
iviote  a  work,  which  Mr.  Maguire  asserts,  is  spurious,  against 
the  Eutychian  heresy,  which  seems  to  have  aimed  at  the  intro- 
duction of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 

Did  not  Ephrem  of  Antioch,  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth 
century,  oppose  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  when  he 
says  : 

"  No  man  of  common  sense  will  assert  that  the  nature  of  things  palpable 
and  impalpable,  visible  and  invisible,  is  the  same — thus  the  body  of  Christ 

WHICH    IS    received    BY    THE    FAITHFUL,    DOES    NOT  DEPART  FROM    ITS  OWN 

sensible  SUBSTANCE,  though  by  virtue  of  consecration  it  is  united  to  a  spir- 
itual grace  ;  and  thus  baptism,  though  a  spiritual  thing  itself,  yet  preserves 
the  water  which  is  the  property  of  its  sensible  substance ;  it  loses  not  what  it 
was  before." — ^Ephrem  Antioch.  Cont  Eutych.  A  pud  Phot.  Cod.  229. 

Facundus,  in  the  6th  century,  says  : 

"  The  sacrament  of  adoption  may  be  called  adoption,  just  as  the  sacrament 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  lohich  is  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine,  we 
are  wont  to  call  his  body  and  blood.  Jfot  indeed  that  the  bread  it  properly  hit 
bcdy,  or  that  the  wine  is  properly  his  blood,  but  because  they  corZain  the  mys- 
tery of  his  body  and  blood  within  themselves  j  hence  it  wa?  that  our  Lord 


2SS  THE    DOCTRINE    OF     TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 

denominated  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine  which  he  dcHvered  to  his  disci- 
ples, in  his  own  body  and  blood." — (Facund.  Defens.  Concil.  Chalcsd.Hb.  ix, 
c  4,  oper.  p.  144.) 

Was  not  Facund  us,  in  the  sixth  century,  opposed  to  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation? 

Further — Rabanus  Maurus,  archbishop  of  Mentz,  about  the 
year  847,  reciting  the  very  words  of  Paschasius  Radbert,  of 
Corby,  in  which  he  broached  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation, 
has  this  remarkable  passage.  Before,  however,  I  read  the 
quotation,  permit  me  to  remark,  that  Bellarmine  and  Sirmondua 
allow,  that  Paschasius  was  the  first  who  wrote  a  regular  treatise 
upon  transub&tantiation.     Bellarmine  says, 

"This  author  was  the  first  who  had  seriously  and  copiously  written  con- 
cerning the  *xuth  of  Christ's  body  and  blood  in  the  Eucharist"— (De  Scriptor 
Eccles.) 

Sirmondus  thus — 

"  He  so  first  explained  the  genuine  sense  of  the  Catholic  church,  that  he 
opened  the  way  to  the  rest,  who  afterwards  in  great  numbers  wrote  upon  the 
same  argument,"— (In  vita  Paschasii.) 

The  archbishop  of  Mentz,  in  the  ninth  century,  writes, 

"  Some  (says  he)  of  late,  ndt  having  a  right  opinion  concerning  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord,  have  said  that  this  is  the  body  and 
blood  of  our  Lord,  which  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  in  which  our 
Lord  suffered  upon  the  cross  and  ros&  from  the  dead  ;  which  error  (says 
he)  we  have  opposed  with  all  our  might." — (Epist.  ad  Heribaldum,  c.  33.) 

Transubstantiation  was  also  opposed  by  Heribaldus,  Bishop 
of  Auxerres  in  France,  by  John  Scotus  Erigena,  (which  means 
an  Irishman)  and  Bertram  of  Corby.  Bertram  tells  us  in  his 
preface,  that 

"  They  who  according  to  their  several  opinions  talked  of  the  difficulties 
about  Christ's  body  and  blood,  were  divided  with  no  small  schism." 

My  friend  has  seen  that  Eutyches,  the  heretic,  believed  in 
transubstantiation,  and  that  the  doctrine  was  opposed  by  several 
writers,  without  any  ecclesiastical  fulmination  having  been 
directed  against  them.  Even  the  second  council  of  Nice,  as 
has  been  already  observed,  declared,  as  one  reason  for  worship- 
ing the  image  of  Christ,  that  he  is  not  sensibly  present  on  earth, 
and  anathematized  all  who  asserted,  that  Christ  was  not  circum- 
scribed as  to  his  humanity.  Several  Roman  Catholic  writers 
virtually  admit  the  modern  origin  of  transubstantiation.  Scotus 
allows,  that  the  doctrine  was  not  always  considered  as  necessary 
to  be  believed,  but  that  the  necessity  of  believing  it  was  conse- 
quent to  the  declaration  of  the  church  made  in  the  council  of 
Lateran,  under  Pope  Innocent  III. — In  sent.  L.  4,  Dist 
11,  Q.  3. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    239 

Durandus  frankly  discovers  his  inclination, 

"  To  have  believed  the  contrary,  if  the  church  had  not  by  that  determina- 
lion  obliged  men  to  believe  it." — In  sent.  L.  4,  Dist.  11,  Gl.  1,  N.  15. 

Tonstal,  Bishop  of  Durham,  also  admits,  that 

"  Before  the  fourth  Lateran  council,  men  were  at  liberty  as  to  the  manner 
of  Christ's  presence  in  the  sacrament." — De  Euchar.  lib.  i,  p.  146. 

Erasmus,  who  lived  and  died  in  the  Roman  church,  and  than 
whom  no  man  was  better  acquainted  with  the  ancient  Fathers, 
confesses  that  it  was 

"  Late  before  the  church  defined  tran substantiation,  unknown  to  the  ancients 
both  name  and  thing-." — 1  Epist.  ad  Corinth,  c.  7,  Citante  etiam  Salmerone, 
torn.  9,  tract  16,  p.  i68. 

Alphonsus  a  Castro  says,  that 

"  Concerning  the  tran  substantiation  of  the  bread  into  the  body  of  Christ, 
there  is  seldom  any  mention  in  the  ancient  writers." — De  Haeres.lib.  8. 

In  connection  with  this  subject,  I  meet  the  strange  position  of 
my  friend  relative  to  the  Waldenses,  namely,  that  they  believed 
in  transubstantiation,  by  a  quotation  from  JVLilner^s  End  of  Con^ 
trover sy  : 

"  It  is  incontestible,  and  carried  to  the  highest  degree  of  moral  evidence, 
that  all  Christians,  of  all  the  nations  of  the  world,  Greeks  as  well  as  Latins, 
Africans  as  well  as  Europeans,  except  Protestants,  and  a  handful  of  Vau- 
Dois  peasants,  have  in  all  ages  believed,  and  still  believe  in  the  Real  Presence 
and  Transubstantiation." — London,  1S24,  5th  edit.  p.  273. 

Here  Milner  distinctly  admits,  that  the  Yaudois  or  Waldenses 
did  not  believe  in  transubstantiation. 

The  following  is  an  extract  from  their  Confession  of  Faith, 
which  was  read  publicly  before  Francis  I,  of  France  : 

"  We  believe,  that  the  holy  sacrament  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  table  is 
a  sacred  memorial  and  aii  act  of  thanksgivings  for  the  benefits  which  we  have 
received  by  the  death  of  Christ ;  and  that  it  ought  to  be  celebrated  in  the 
assembly  of  the  saints,  in  faith  and  charity,  and  by  an  inward  experience  of 
Christ's  merits.  It  is  thus,  by  partaking  of  the  bread  and  wine,  we  have 
communion  with  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  as  we  read  in  the  holy 
scriptures." 

Again,  we  read  in  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  1120. — Leger's 
History,  p.  92. 

"  We  believe,  that  after  this  life  there  are  only  two  places,  one  for  the  saved, 
which  is  called  Paradise,  and  one  for  the  damned,  which  is  called  Hell,  utterly 
denying  that  feigned  purgatoryof  Antichrist,  invented  in  opposition  to  truth." 

"  We  believe  that  the  sacraments  are  signs  or  the  visible  forms  of  holy 
things." 

Did  they  offer  masses  for  souls  in  purgatory,  when  they  did 
not  believe  in  its  existence?  I  have  referred  to  their  standard 
formularies  ;  and  any  one  who  will  examine  their  history,  as 
given  by  Mr.  Gillie,  will  find  additional  proofs  that  they  protested 
against  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass. 


240  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

Luther,  Mr.  Maguire  says,  is  on  his  side.  This  is  the  first 
time  in  which  I  have  heard,  that  consubstantiation  is  the  same 
with  transubstantiation.  I  confess,  I  am  somewhat  surprised, 
that  most  of  the  early  reformers  were  enabled  so  easily  to  throw 
offm  toto  a  doctrine  which  so  closely  adheres  to  persons  brought 
up  in  the  pale  of  the  church  of  Rome.  I  do  not  justify  the  lan- 
guage \^hich  Luther  employed  when  condemning  those  who 
wrote  against  his  principles.  Mr.  Maguii  e  has  stated,  that  it  is 
a  spiritual  body  which  is  offered  up  in  the  mass.  Does  this 
opinion  agree  with  the  council  of  Trent  ?  The  council  informs 
us  that — 

*^Jn  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  the  same  Christ  is  contained  and  unblooilily  im- 
molatedf  who  once  offered  himself  bloodily  on  the  cross,"     Sess.  22.  ch.  2. 

Was  it  a  spiritual  body  that  suffered  on  Calvary  ?  I  deny 
that  the.  devil  is  omnipresent.  His  influence  is  extended  by  the 
agency  of  innumerable  spirits  who  are  under  his  control.  I  did 
not  circumscribe  the  presence  of  Christ.  I  believe,  that,  where 
two  or  three  meet  together  in  his  name,  He  is  in  the  midst  of 
them.  But,  though  he  be  present  through  the  universe  in  his 
divinity,  yet  the  heavens  will  receive  his  manhood  till  the  time 
of  the  restitution  of  all  things. — Acts,  iii,  21.  I  have  here  the 
book  of  Sir  Edwin  Sandys.  Mr.  Maguire  did  not  accept  my 
offer,  that  a  Protestant  and  a  Roman  Catholic  should  examine 
the  work.  Let  them  compare  mine  with  Mr.  Maguire's  edition, 
and  they  will  find  mine  to  be  the  original  volume. 

My  friend  has  talked  of  my  having  Trinity  college  at  my 
back  :  it  was  not  handsome  to  speak  is  this  style.  When  Mr. 
Maguire  expressed  a  wish  to  obtain  access  to  a  public  library, 
I  requested  a  friend  to  introduce  him  at  Marsh's  library ;  and 
I  informed  Mr.  Maguire,  that  my  friend  was  ready  to  accom- 
pany him  thither.  Did  this  circumstance  look  as  if  I  wished  to 
take  any  unfair  advantage  of  Mr.  Maguire  ?  The  passover,  my 
opponent  obs-erves,  was  a  type  of  Christ.  The  Lamb  in  the 
passover  was  indeed  a  type  of  the  Saviour,  not  in  transub- 
stantiation, but  of  the  body  on  Calvary.  The  passover  was 
perhaps  typical  of  the  feast  of  the  eucharist,  which  God's  people 
celebrate  in  commemoration  of  their  dying,  risen,  and  glorified 
Redeemer. 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  have  caught  my  friend,  Mr.  Pope,  in  the 
act  of  using  garbled  quotations.  I  have  already  asserted  that 
he  took  his  quotations  obstetricanie  manu^  and  I  now  insist  that 
I  have  detected  him  in  making  a  false  quotation.  Before  I 
shall  expose  either  his  disingenuity,  or,  what  I  rather  suspect, 
his  want  of  industry,  I  shall  for  a  moment  recur  to  the  work  as- 
cribed to  Gelasius,  and  give  you  the  reasons  which  are  assigned. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.      241 

to  prove  that  it  is  not  genuine.  Pope  Gelasius's  work  against 
Eutyches,  is  described  by  Genadius,  lib.  de.  viris  illust.  cap.  14» 
as  "  Grande  et  prmclarum  voiumen.^^  Now,  in  the  first  place, 
the  present  work  is  in  no  wise  deservin^j  of  such  a  character. 
Secondly,  in  his  CathoUcorum  Testimonia  Magistrorum,  he 
every  where  praises  the  Arians,  and  is  profoundly  silent  about 
the  orthodox  Fathers.  These  considerations  amount  to  a  strong 
suspicion,  that  it  could  not  have  proceeded  from  the  pen  of  Pope 
<xelasius,  and  it  is  therefore  rationally  considered  as  the  produc- 
tion of  Gelasius  Cyzinicus. 

I  will  now  read  to  you  the  dialogue  of  Theodoret,  who  has 
been  introduced  as  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation : 
let  the  following  serve  as  a  preface.     He  says, 

"Christ  at  his  last  supper  showed  the  true  original  of  which  this  Paschal 
Lamb  was  a  type;  opened  the  gates  of  the  holy  sacrament;  and  gave  his 
most  precious  body  and  blood,  not  only  to  the  eleven  Apostles,  but  also  to  the 
traitor  Judas.  These  words,  "  He  shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord,"  mean  this,  that  as  Judas  betrayed  him,  and  the  Jews  insulted  him,  so 
they  offer  him  a  very  great  affront  who  take  his  most  holy  body  with  unclean 
hands  and  put  it  into  a  defiled  mouth." — In  1  Cor.  cap.  11. 

There  is  not  any  thing  surely  there  contrary  to  the  doctrine 
of  transubstantiation.  He  proceeds  to  say,  in  his  second  dia- 
logue, immediately  after  the  words  quoted  by  Mr.  Pope — '*The 
elements,  after  consecration,  are  to  be  adored,''^  But  Mr.  Pope 
took  good  care  to  foist  upon  us  the  word  venerate  for  the  word 
adore,  as  if  Theodoret  had  said,  the  elements  after  consecration 
are  to  be  venerated,  whereas  he  e:?.pressly  says,  they  are  to  be 
adored.  Mr.  Pope,  in  his  version,  has  substituted  the  word 
"  venerated^^  for  the  word  "  adored  "  I  charge  him  with  a  griev- 
ous mangling  of  the  text.  Adond  is  the  word,  as  will  be  found 
by  a  reference  to  the  original.  If  Theodoret  denied  transub- 
stantiation, would  he  say  that  .ne  elements  of  bread  and  wine 
after  consecration  are  to  be  adored?  Surely  he  would  not  tell 
us  to  adore  a  piece  of  bread  and  a  drop  of  wine.  Mr.  Pope 
therefore  should  consign  to  execration  the  author  by  whom  he 
was  misled,  for  I  am  unwilling  to  believe  that  he  would  himself 
so  distort  the  original,  and  seek  to  palm  upon  an  unsuspecting 
pubUc  a  text  so  monstrously  garbled. 

Theodoret  in  his  dialogue,  introduces  Orthodoxus  (a  Catholic) 
and  Eranistes  (a  heretic)  disputing  u;,on  the  Eucharist.  Hav- 
ing previously  disputed  about  the  Eutychian  heresy,  concerning 
the  two  natures  of  Christ,  (the  Eutychians  contending  that  the 
humanity  was  absorbed  in  the  divinity,)  Eranistes  puts  the  fol- 
lowing questions  to  Orthodoxus  : — 

"Eranistes, — How  do  you  call  these  (the  elements)  after  consecration  I 
Orthodoxus, — Th*.  \ody  and  blood  of  Christ. 

21 


242  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSU  BSTANTI ATION. 

Er. — Do  you  believe  that  you  perceive  tiie  body  and  blood  of  Christ  1 

Or. — I  do  believe  it. 

Er. — Why  are  the  names  changed  ? 

Or. — The  reason  is  evident  to  those  who  understand  the  mystery ;  foi 
Christ  would  not  have  us  regard  the  nature  of  what  we  see,  but  as  the  namea 
of  the  elements  are  changed,  so  to  apprehend  by  faith  the  change  which  is 
made  in  them  by  grace.  The  mystical  symbols  after  consecration  do  not 
depart  from  their  own  nature,  but  they  are  understood  to  be  the  things  which 
they  are  made,  and  so  they  are  believed^  and  they  are  adored  as  being  the  ihings 
which  they  are  believed.''^ 

Thus,  it  must  be  said,  that  Theodoret  urged  the  idolatroug 
adoration  of  mere  bread  and  wine,  or  that  he  believed  and  taught 
the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 

What  are  the  things  to  be  believed  when  the  body  and  bloo«' 
are  adored!  Is  it  to  be  beUeved  that  they  remain  bread  ana 
wine  1  What  a  wonderful  effort  of  faith  truly  !  But  Ortho- 
doxus  tells  us,  that  the  things  believed  are  to  be  adored. 

The  Fathers  all  agree  in  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation, 
and  anathematize  all  those  who  controvert  that  doctrine.  With 
regard  to  the  parallel  between  Transubstantiation  and  the  Trin- 
ity, my  friend  denies  its  existence,  but  I  call  upon  him  to  prove 
that  transubstantiation  is  not  a  mystery,  as  Theodoret  calls  it. 
He  denies  that  transubstantiation  is  founded  upon  scripture. 
Christ,  the  eternal  Son  of  a  good  and  gracious  God,  made  a 
wonderful  promise  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  John,  shall  we 
say,  after  reading  that  solemn  and  divine  promise,  that  he  left 
nothing  to  us  but  a  mere  bit  of  bread  and  wine  !  Is  it  not  evi- 
dent, that  he  intended  to  leave  with  us  a  grand  and  noble  gift 
worthy  of  the  Testator,  and  in  accordance  with  his  omnipotence? 
Yet,  if  we  are  led  by  the  Calvinistic  doctrines,  propounded  by. 
Mr.  Pope,  we  must  believe  that  he  intended  only  to  bequeath  to 
us  a  mere  bit  of  bread,  and  a  drop  wine !  Would  that  be  wor- 
thy of  the  Deity]  Can  such  a  belief  be  reconciled  with  the 
facts  recorded  in  scripture  ?  There  we  find  that  he  raised  the 
expectations  of  his  disciples  to  the  highest  pitch,  and  that  many 
of  them  went  away  shocked  at  his  expressions.  He  did  not 
correct  their  error,  if  such  it  were.  When  he  came  to  his  last 
supper,  what  did  he  say?  There,  while  solemnly  seated  with 
liis  apostles,  he  raised  his  eyes  to  heaven,  he  took  bread  in  his 
hands,  blessed  it,  and  broke  it  saying,  "  Take  ye  and  eat— 
THIS  IS  MY  BODY." 

It  is  not  my  custom  to  lose  my  temper,  and  to  indulge  in  harsh 
and  angry  expressions — I  will  not  say,  that  I  fling  back  with 
indignation  any  of  the  charges  brought  forward  by  my  opponent. 
I  have  been  taught  to  exercise  a  self-control,  and  I  know  that 
uui  Saviour  tells  us — "  Love  your  enemies  ;  do  good  to  thera 
that  hate  you ;  bless  them  that  curse  you,  and  pray  for  them  that 
calumniate  you  !     And  to  him  that  striketh  thee  on  one  cheek, 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.     243 

offer  also  the  other."  This  is  the  practical  part  of  Christianity. 
It  accords  not  with  the  suggestions  of  flesh  and  blood,  nor  with 
the  maxims  of  modern  gospel  liberty.  Mnega  teipsum  is  the 
precept  of  the  gospel,  though  it  may  form  no  portion  of  Mr. 
Pope's  moral  creed,  By  my  forbearance  upon  this  occasion, 
I  shall  furnish  Mr.  Pope  with,  at  least,  one  instance  of  Christian 
humility.  I  may  here  remark,  that  one  of  the  newspapers  has, 
in  the  report  of  a  former  day's  discussion,  represented  me  as 
appropriating  to  m.yself,  that  which  I  quoted  as  the  language  of 
our  Saviour — "  Learn  of  me,  because  I  am  meek  and  humble 
of  heart." 

With  regard  to  the  senses,  my  friend  has  said,  that  they  can- 
not all  contradict  themselves.  But  a  portion  may,  and  I  made 
an  exception  for  the  sense  of  hearing.  I  referred  in  support  of 
that  portion  to  St.  Paul — "  Faith  cometh  by  hearings  and  hear- 
ing by  the  words  of  Christ." — (Rom.  x,  17.)  Hearing  then  is 
the  only  sense  constituted  as  a  judge  of  mysteries.  But  I  ask, 
did  not  all  the  senses  contradict  themselves,  when  our  Saviour 
walked  upon  the  waters,  and  it  is  recorded  of  his  disciples — 
"  Putaverent  Phanlasma  esse.^^  Did  not  the  senses  here  deceive 
the  Apostles,  as  they  did  others,  in  several  cases  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament ?  They  did  not  contradict  themselves  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  word.  The  matters  which  they  related  were  not  founded 
on  fact,  but  they  reiated  what  appeared  to  themselves.  So  far 
their  relation  was  correct.  My  friend  says,  that  the  mistake 
into  which  the  sense  of  sight  falls  as  to  the  stick  in  the  water, 
may  be  corrected  by  the  sense  of  touch.  But  if  one  sense  con- 
tradicts another  in  rebus  naiur  alihus,  how  much  more  likely  to 
do  so  in  things  of  a  supernatural  order? 

He  asks  me  how  do  I  know  that  Christ  spoke  the  words, 
"  This  is  my  body" — which  he  has  unsuccessfully  endeavoured 
to  explain  away.  I  answer,  that  I  depend  here  upon  the  au- 
thority of  the  church  of  Christ.  Mr.  Pope  depends  on  the  trans- 
lators of  the  Bible  in  the  reign  of  James  1.  I  place  my  reliance 
upon  an  authority  to  which  our  divine  Redeemer  expressly  pro- 
mised infallibility.  Mr.  Pope  believes  in  no  church,  but  relies 
upon  his  own  private  judgment.  I  called  upon  him  to  show  how 
a  Protestant  could,  according  to  his  principles,  make  an  act  of 
faith.     Has  he  ever  answered  the  question  1 

He  recurs  to  Melchisedech.  But  here  I  have  him  caught  in 
his  own  net,  as  in  the  instance  of  Theodoret.  He  says  that 
Melchisedech  made  no  offering — I  proved  that  he  made  an  offer- 
ing of  bread  and  wine.  St.  Jerome  maintains  the  same  opinion, 
and  St.  Paul  evidently  alludes  to  it  when  he  speaks  of  our 
Saviour  being  "  a  priest  for  ever  according  to  the  order  of  Mel- 
chisedech."    Mr.  Pope  talks  of  my  admission,  that  there  ts  no 


244     THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIAT.  ON. 

prohibition  to  the  reading  of  the  scriptures  in  the  three  sacred 
languages,  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin,  because  portions  of  scrip- 
tare  have  been  published  in  each  of  them.  In  respect  to  the 
vulgar  tongues,  the  church  never  prohibited  the  reading  of  the 
sciptures  in  them.  She  restricted  the  right  where  she  though 
it  would  be  abused  ;  she  restricted  it  in  order  to  prevent  the 
multiplication  of  heresies,  and  the  generation  of  sects,  such  ass 
the  Anabaptists,  the  Muggletonians,  and  hundreds  of  others,  who, 
like  a  swarm  of  locusts,  or  the  ten  plagues  of  Egypt,  infest  the 
country,  distract  the  community,  and  rend  asunder  the  Protes- 
tant churches.  It  was  to  guard  against  such  evils  that  the 
Catholic  church  wisely  forbade  the  indiscriminate  reading  of  the 
scriptures.  Mr.  Pope  has  accused  our  translation  of  the  Bible 
as  being  filled  with  various  errors,  Yet  when  the  "saints"  travel 
through  the  country,  they  would  persuade  the  poor  people  that 
there  is  no  difference  between  our  Bible  and  theirs.  But  when 
they  come  to  speak  to  scholars  on  the  subject,  they  will  have  it 
that  thousands  of  errors  exist  in  our  Bible.  They  then  openly 
tell  rank  falsehoods  to  promote  their  cause — I  do  not  accuse 
Mr.  Pope  of  rank  falsehood.  But  is  it  not  evident  from  this, 
that  there  is  neither  honour  nor  veracity  amongst  the  generality 
of  the  "  saints  "?  He  says,  that  by  reason  of  the  admissions 
which  I  have  made,  I  would  be  called  to  an  account  if  an  inqui- 
sition existed  in  this  country ;  and  that  moreover  I  would  be 
excruciated  for  my  heterodoxy.  But  Protestants  are  in  general 
very  little  acquainted  with  our  religion.  They  have  through 
their  ignorance  transformed  our  faith  into  an  hideous  caricature. 

He  says  that  the  Italian  version  was  admitted  by  me  to  be 
superior  to  the  Latin  Vulgate.  I  deny  the  assertion.  I  said, 
that  the  Italian  version  was  admitted  to  be  the  purest  copy  of  the 
Bible  extant — it  was  for  that  reason  that  St.  Jerome,  as  he  ad- 
mits in  his  preface,  followed  the  Italian  version,  and  upon  it  laid 
the  foundation  of  the  Latin  Vulgate.  Where  is  the  contradic- 
tion now? 

Mr.  Pope  quoted  a  Catholic  writer  to  prove  that  Christ  was 
not  sensibly  present  in  the  sacrament.  I  never  said  that  Christ 
was  sensibly  present  in  the  sacrament.  Let  Mr.  Pope  remein- 
oer  that  Scotus,  the  author  from  whom  he  quotes,  was  condem- 
ned by  the  Catholic  church  for  many  of  his  positions,  which  are 
far  from  being  deemed  orthodox.  As  to  Erasmus,  there  are 
some  of  his  opinions  not  very  orthodox,  though  he,  like  Henry 
VIII,  thought  it  safest  to  die  in  the  Catholic  church. — Like 
many  of  the  present  day,  who,  in  the  enjoyment  of  youth  and 
riches,  cast  their  derisions  at  Popery,  and  yet  are  glad,  when 
their  end  approaches,  to  return  to  the  mother  church. 

Mr.  Pooo    ntroduces  Durandus.     It  is  true  he  held  oomions 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.     245 

contrary  to  those  of  the  church,  till  the  definition  of  the  church 
was  declared.  Then  he  yielded  as  he  ought  to  the  authority  of 
the  Cathohc  church,  as  the  illustrious  Fenelon  did  in  later  days. 
I  asserted  that  the  first  of  the  Waldenses  preserved  the  sacrifice 
of  the  mass.  But  their  followers  changed  their  principles,  as 
those  of  Luther  and  Calvin  did  ;  the  Lutherans  preaching  one 
doctrine  and  the  Calvinists  another.  Here,  for  instance,  Mr. 
Pope  admits  only  eighteen  out  of  the  thirty-nine  articles  of  the 
church  of  England — others  will  be  found  to  deny  them  alto- 
gether, and  more  will  reject  the  Anthanasian  creed.  Such  are 
the  multiplied  gradations  produced  by  evangelical  liberty  and 
private  judgment.  It  is  found  necessary  by  Mr.  Pope  to  con- 
nect himself  with  with  the  Waldenses  (perhaps  the  maddes^  of 
all  heretics.)  I  would  beg  leave  to  ask  him,  had  the  Walden- 
ses a  church,  a  ministry,  a  liturgy,  or  any  other  mark  of  the  true 
church  of  Christ,  or  indeed  of  any  church  at  all,  and  if  not,  from 
whom  did  he  receive  the  scriptures?  I  must  here  remark,  that 
his  obtrusive  connexion  with  the  Waldenses  cannot  add  respect- 
ability to  his  origin.  The  Waldenses  were  one  rotten  branch 
lopped  from  the  parent  trunk  by  the  Catholic  church.  I  regret 
extremely  I  did  not  bring  the  ecclesiastical  tree  along  with  me. 
[Here  Mi\  Pope  ha^uled  to  Mr.  Maguire  Dr.  J\lilner''s  "  End  of  Controversy," 
containing  the  ecclesiastical  tree.] 

Oh !  I  perceive,  gentlemen,  to  my  great  surprise,  that  this 
tree,  instead  of  exhibiting  a  naked  trunk,  is  weighed  down  by 
those  branches  which  I  thought  had  been  cut  off,  but  which 
seem  determined  to  cling  with  desperation  to  that  parent  stock 
upon  which  alone  their  vitality  depends,  but  from  which  they  can 
never  moi^  receive  sap  or  nutriment,  by  means  of  that  moral 
separation  which  originated  with  themselves.  Here  are  Cerinthus, 
Arius,  Montanus,  ApolUnaris,  Manicheus,  Eutyches,  Pelagius, 
Socinus,  Huss,  Wickliffe,  Waldo,  Luther,  Cranmer,  struggling 
to  connect  themselves  with  the  Catholic  church,  and  claiming, 
upon  some  occasions,  a  sympathetic  relationship  with  each  other. 
How,  now,  Mr.  Pope,  will  you  or  the  present  Protestant  church 
be  able  to  stitch  yourselves  to  those  various  heretics  1  Were 
they,  I  demand,  or  were  they  not,  more  different  from  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  present  reformers  than  they  were  from  the  Catholic 
church ;  and  would  not  the  ancient  heretics  anathematize  Mr. 
Pope  and  his  doctrines  as  jealously  as  the  Catholic  church 
herself? 

Before  I  conclude,  I  will  give  you  a  few  additional  quotations 
from  the  Fathers,  touching  the  faith  of  the  primitive  church. 
8t.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  commenting  on  John,  torn,  iv,  p.  252, 
after  quoting  the  words  of  St.  John,  "  I  am  the  Tiving  bread  that 
came  down  from  heaven," — (vi,  51,) 

21* 


246  THE    DOCTRIiVE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

"The  manna  was  the  type,  the  shadow,  and  the  image.  *I  am  the  liv  ng 
bread,  if  any  one  shall  eat  of  this  bread,  he  shall  live  for  ever.'  They  t'nat 
eat  of  the  manna  are  dead,  because  it  gave  not  life;  he  that  eats  this  bread, 
that  is  me,  or  my  flesh,  shall  live  for  ever.  Our  Lord  Jesus,  by  his  own  ilesh, 
gives  life  to  us,  and  his  blood  is  not  that  of  any  common  man,  but  the  natural 
blood  of  life  itself.  *  For  he  that  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  abideth 
in  me  and  I  in  him.' — (John,  vi,  56.)  As  he  that  joins  wax  to  wax  forms  of 
them  one  body,  so  it  seems  to  me,  he  that  eats  the  flesh  of  our  Saviour,  and 
drinks  his  precious  blood,  as  himself  savs,  becomes  one  with  him.  Let  these 
verbose  and  absurd  men  tell  us  with  whose  body  the  sheep  of  the  church  are 
fed,  or  from  what  springs  her  children  are  refreshed.  For  if  the  body  of  God 
is  delivered,  thus  God  is  the  true  God,  Christ  the  Lord,  not  a  mere  man,  nor 
an  angel,  as  some  pretend.  And  if  it  be  the  blood  of  God,  the  cup  of  God, 
this  God  is  not  purely  God,  one  of  the  adorable  Trinity,  the  Son  of  Goa  but 
the  Word  ofOmt  made  man.  But  if  the  body  of  Christ  be  our  food,  and  the 
blood  of  Chriai  mji  drink,  and  this  Christ  be  a  mere  man,  how  is  eternal  life 
promised  to  those  who  approach  the  holy  table  ?  And  how  again  shall  this 
body  be  di\  ided  here,  and  in  many  places,  and  not  be  diminished  ?  A  mere 
body  cannot  impart  life  to  those  who  receive  it.  Wherefore  let  us  receive  the 
body  of  life  itself;  that  life  which  for  us  has  dwelt  in  our  body :  and  let  us 
drink  his  sacred  blood  for  the  remission  of  our  sins,  and  so  partake  of  th;it 
immortality  which  is  in  him  ;  believing  Christ  to  be  the  priest  and  the  victim, 
him  that  offers,  and  he  that  is  offered." 

St.  John  Chrysostom,  Horn,  ii,  ad  Pop.  Antioch,  I.  i,  p.  37 — 

"Elias  left  his  garment  to  his  disciple  :  but  the  Son  of  God  left  us  his  own 
flesh.  The  prophet,  indeed,  threw  off*  his  covering,  but  Christ  ascending, 
took  with  him  his  body  and  left  it  also  for  us.  Let  us  not  therefore  repine, 
nor  fear  any  difliiculties,  for  he  who  refused  not  to  shed  his  blood  for  all,  and 
communicated  to  us  his  body  and  blood,  what  will  he  not  do  for  our  salvation  ?" 

And,  Horn,  ii,  in  cap.  14.  Matt,  i,  7. — 

"  Let  us  then  touch  the  hem  of  his  garment,  or  rather  let  us,  if  we  be  so 
t^isposed,  possess  him  entire,  for  his  body  now  lies  before  us,  not  to  be  touched 
only,  but  to  be  eaten  and  to  satiate  us.  And  if  they  who  touched  his  garment 
drew  so  much  virtue  from  it,  how  much  more  shall  we  draw  who  possess  him 
whole?  When,  therefore,  thou  seest  the  priest  presenting  the  body  to  thee, 
think  not  that  it  is  his  hand,  but  the  hand  of  Christ  that  is  stretched  towards 
thee." 

So,  gentlemen,  that  objection  of  Mr.  Pope  is  here  fully 
answered,  viz, — that  the  priest  made  his  God — for  here  St. 
Chrysostom  declares,  that  the  action  is  not  performed  by  man, 
but  by  Christ  himself — which  agrees  with  St.  Cyril,  that  Christ 
is  both  the  priest  and  the  victim. 

Mr.  Pope. — My  friend  has  drawn  a  strange  distinction  between 
outward  appearances  and  species.  The  schoolmen,  borrowing 
from  Aristotle,  introduced  a  curious  fancy  ;  they  supposed,  that 
the  universe  consisted  of  a  mass  of  matter,  invested  by  certain 
forms  and  qualities  which  possess  a  real  and  substantial  being. 
This  was  a  very  fortunate  discovery  for  the  school  divines  ;  it 
served  to  explain  the  bodily  presence  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament; 
the  substance  of  the  bread  and  wine,  said  they,  is  converted  into 
his  body  and  blood  ;  but  the  absolute  accidents,  the  substantial 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    247 

forms  of  both  remain  as  before  ;  hence  the  term  transubstantia- 
tion.  Now  surely  it  is  most  ridiculous  to  assert,  that  that  which 
has  all  the  properties  of  bread,  should  not  be  bread  ;  and  that 
that  which  has  none  of  the  properties  of  flesh,  should  be  flesh. 
I  am  not  quite  so  certain  that  the  gravy  is  the  blood  of  the 
animal ;  however,  I  congratulate  Mr.  Maguire  upon  the  strict 
observance  of  the  washing  of  feet  in  the  church  of  Rome.  Upon 
a  certain  day,  I  am  informed  that  a  golden  ewer  is  prepared,  and 
the  Pope  washes  the  feet  of  some  mendicants.  I  wish  to  know, 
does  Mr.  Maguire  follow  the  example  of  his  holiness  at  Rome! 
My  friend  observes,  that  Christ  can  extricate  himself  from  the 
elements,  if  likely  to  corrupt.  Let  us  examine  the  Roman 
Missal  upon  this  head. 

"  If  through  negligence  any  part  of  the  blood  of  Christ  should  fall  upon  the 
ground  or  upon  the  table,  let  it  be  licked  up,  and  let  the  place  be  sufficiently 
scraped,  ana  the  scrapings  burned,  but  let  the  ashes  be  buried  in  holy  ground. 
But  if  it  should  fall  upon  the  stone  of  the  altar,  let  the  priest  drink  up  the  drop, 
and  let  the  place  be  well  washed,  and  the  washing  thrown  into  holy  ground. 
If  the  drop  should  reach  the  first,  second,  and  third  linen-cloth,  let  the  cloths 
be  three  times  washed  where  the  drop  fell,  the  chalice  having  been  placed 
under,  and  let  the  water  of  ablution  be  thrown  into  holy  ground.  But  if  it 
should  fall  only  on  the  sacerdotal  vestments  themselves,  they  ought  in  the 
same  manner  be  washed,  and  the  washing  thrown  into  holy  ground.  If  it 
should  fall  upon  the  cloth  or  the  carpet  placed  underneath  the  feet,  let  it  be 
well  washed  as  before.  If  it  should  happen,  that  all  the  blood  should  be 
poured  forth  after  consecration,  if  indeed  any,  even  a  little,  shall  remain,  let 
that  be  taken,  and  let  that  which  has  been  mentioned  be  done  with  the 
remainder  of  the  blood.  But  if  none  shall  remain,  let  the  priest  place  wine 
in  the  chalice  again,  and  let  him  consecrate  it  from  that  place  'likewise  after 
supper  ;'  the  oblation,  however,  of  the  chalice  having  been  made  as  before. 
If  the  priest  should  disgorge  the  eucharist,  if  the  s^/ccies  should  appear  entire, 
let  them  be  reverently  taken,  if  nausea  does  not  prevent;  in  that  case,  let 
the  consecrated  species  be  cautiously  separated,  and  laid  up  in  some  secret 
place,  until  they  become  corrupted  ;  and  afterwards  let  them  be  thrown  into 
holy  ground.  But  if  the  species  do  not  appear,  let  that  be  burned  which  has 
been  disgorged,  and  the  ashes  thrown  into  holy  ground.  If  the  consecrated 
host,  or  any  part  of  it,  fall  upon  the  ground,  let  it  be  reverently  taken  up,  and 
the  place  where  it  fell,  cleansed,  and  a  little  scraped,  and  let  the  dust,  or 
scrapings  of  that  nature,  be  thrown  into  holy  ground.  If  it  should  fall  with- 
out the  corporal  upon  the  napkin  or  in  any  manner  upon  any  cloth,  let  the 
napkin  or  cloth  be  carefully  washed,  and  let  the  washing  itself  be  poured  out 
upon  holy  ground." — De  defect,  circ.  Miss.  occ.  Miss,  Rom.  1822,  Dubl. 

Pardon  me  for  having  read  so  much,  and  excuse  me  for  not 
reading  the  whole.  I  wonder,  why  such  a  process  should  be 
enjoined,  if  the  Saviour's  body  is  supposed  not  to  he  present 
afler  the  decomposition  of  the  elements  I 

I  have  already  proved,  that  the  difficulty  of  convincing  the 
Socinian,  is  greater  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Maguire  than  on  mhie. 
I  observed,  that  I  could  argue  on  the  scriptures,  as  acknowledged 
by  the  Socinian,  while  my  friend  would  refer  him  to  the  U7iiversal 
consent  of  mankind.     Now  we  have  shown,  that  Arianism  at  one 


248  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

period  prevailed  in  the  church  of  Rome ;  the  Sociniun  will, 
therefore,  reply,  that  he  too  has  tradition  on  his  side ;  he  will 
therefore  wish  Mr.  Maguire  good  morning,  when  he  introduces 
the  infallibility  and  authority  of  his  church.  If  my  friend's 
quotations  from  Protestant  bishops  be  correct,  I  can  only  say, 
that  they  were  not  true  to  their  principles,  for  the  articles  of  the 
established  church,  emphatically  assert,  that  the  elements  should 
not  be  adored.  We  are  told,  that  there  is  a  difference  between 
a  mystery  and  a  miracle.  Let  the  opinion  go  forth,  and  stand 
as  a  ruled  case,  that  there  is  no  miracle  in  transubstantiation. 
Some  of  the  Fathers,  I  allow,  used  strong  expressions  respect- 
mg  the  eucharist.  If  Theodoret  believed  in  transubstantiation, 
he  could  not  have  met,  in  the  way  in  which  he  does,  the  argu- 
ment of  Eutyches.  He  spoke  of  a  moral,  but  not  a  physical 
change,  and  conceived  that  the  moral  change,  which,  he  believed, 
took  place,  entitled  the  elements  to  respect  and  veneration. 
Mr.  Maguire  asks,  did  Christ  leave  behind  him  nothing  but 
bread  and  winel  Yes;  he  has  bequeathed  to  his  people  the 
records  of  inspiration,  which  bear  witness  to  his  glorious  v/ork 
on  Calvary,  when  he  bowed  his  head  and  gave  up  the  ghost.  I 
asked  Mr.  Maguire,  how  he  knew  that  the  words,  "  this  is  my 
body,"  are  to  be  found  in  the  Bible.  I  am  told,  by  the  authority 
of  his  church.  Now^  the  examination  of  the  proofs  of  that 
authority,  demands  the  exercise  of  sense  ;  and  if  so,  why  should 
not  the  same  exercise  of  sense  be  admitted  upon  transubstantia- 
tion ?  I  employed  strong  language,  'tis  true,  in  refutation  of  the 
charge  which  Mr.  Maguire  brought  against  me — but  believe  me, 
I  did  not  speak  under  the  impulse  of  passion.  Mr.  Maguire 
has  directed  me  to  himself  as  an  example  of  humility.  I  appeal 
to  the  present  meeting,  whether  we  have  not  had  a  singular 
exhibition  of  effrontery  on  his  part,  in  defiance  of  common  sense 
and  rational  argumentation  1  My  friend  has  referred  us  to  the 
instance  of  the  Saviour  having  been  taken  for  a  spirit ;  but  he 
should  remember,  that  at  the  moment  the  Apostles  did  not  dis- 
tinctly see  him  ;  but  as  soon  as  they  heard  his  voice,  they  cried 
out,  "it  is  the  Lord."  As  to  an  act  of  faith  being  made  by  a 
Protestant,  I  shall  not  go  over  the  same  ground  so  often  travelled 
before.  Mr.  Maguire  observes,  that  St.  Paul  applies  the  term 
priest  to  Melchisedech :  but  this  circumstance  does  not  prove 
the  bread  and  wine  to  have  been  a  sacrifice.  The  truth  of  this 
observation  can  be  seen,  as  I  have  already  said,  by  corsulting 
the  Old  Testament.  I  called  upon  Mr.  Maguire  to  prove,  that 
the  term  isQsvg,  a  sacrificing  priest,  was  ever  applied  to  the  min- 
isters of  Christ  in  the  new  dispensation ;  he  has  not  met  that 
question.  I  again  assert,  that  there  is  no  isQsvg  on  earth,  pos- 
i?essing  any  authority  under  the  Christian  dispensation.     The 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANl  lAl  ION.    249 

priesthood  of  Christ  is  unchangeable,  and  therefore  not  to  be 
transferred  ;  that  of  the  Jews  was  changeable,  because  they  were 
subject  to  death.  The  priesthood  is  now  concentrated  in  him,, 
who  sits  for  ever  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  in  the  Hea« 
vens.  My  friend  has  remarked,  that  Protestants  assert,  that 
there  is  no  difference  between  the  Roman  Catholic  and  Protes- 
tant Bible  ;  the  Douay  version,  I  admit,  though  corrupted,  still 
retains  fundamental  truths.  You  shall  hear  Dr.  Doyle's  opinion 
of  the  Protestant  translation  : — 

*'Ct.  Do  you  consider  the  authorized  translation  of  the  church  of  England 
as  of  a  sufficiently  perverse  quality,  to  merit  the  description,  (given  in  the 
encyclical  letter  of  the  Pope,  dated  Rome,  May  3,  1824, — that  by  a  perverse 
interpretation,  the  gospel  of  Christ  may  be  turned  into  a  human  gospel,  or 
what  is  worse,  into  the  gospel  of  the  devil  ?) 

'*  A.  As  I  said  before,  God  forbid  I  should  so  consider  it ;  for  though  it  has 
many  errors,  /  consider  it  one  of  the  noblest  translations  that  ever  has  been  pro- 
duced; this,  I  say,  while  looking  upon  it,  as  abounding  with  inaccuracies, 
and  having  many  errors." — •^pp.  to  Report  for  Com.  on  Education  in  Ireland^ 
p.  791. 

In  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Doyle,  we  perceive,  that  the  authorized 
version  is  one  of  the  noblest  translations  that  ever  has  been  pro- 
duced. I  still  insist,  that,  in  several  instances,  the  translations 
in  the  authorized  version,  regarded  by  Ward  as  erroneous,  have 
been  adopted  by  Dr.  Murray,  in  his  edition  of  the  Douay  Bible 
lately  published.  (See  Hamilton's  Letters  to  the  Roman 
Catholic  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  on  the  State  of  the  present 
English  R.  C.  Bible.) 

Mr.  Maguire  persists  in  saying,  that  the  Waldenses  believed 
in  transubstantiation.  In  refutation  of  the  assertion,  I  have 
read  to  you  extracts  from  their  creeds,  and  a  passage  from  Dr. 
Milner's  End  of  Controversy.  You  have  heard  much  of  the 
Apostolic  tree  in  Dr.  Milner.  You  will  find,  upon  examination, 
however,  that  the  mention  of  some  Popes  is  altogether  omitted. 
To  change  the  metaphor — I  should  hke  to  know,  when  the  links 
were  broken  in  the  Apostolic  chain,  for  instance,  at  the  time  of 
the  council  of  Constance,  by  what  process  the  spiritual  Vulcan 
was  able  to  join  them  together  again?  My  friend  has  talked  of 
the  Waldenses  being  heretics.  I  have  already  referred  you  to 
the  commendation  of  Lewis  XII,  and  the  report  of  his  commis- 
sioners, which  prove  that  the  Waldenses  held  the  truths  of  the 
blessed  gospel.  As  to  Mr.  Maguire's  quotation  from  Luther,  ] 
can  prove  that  that  which  Mr.  Maguire  says,  was  a  literal  con- 
versation with  the  devil,  is  merely  figurative.  Sagittarius  proves, 
that  Justus  Jonas,  Luther's  colleague,  who  translated  this  piece 
of  Luther's  writings  into  Latin,  left  out  many  words,  particularly 
the  following  passage : 

"Meo  corde^  multas  enim  noctea  mihi  acerbas  fecit" 


250  THE    DOCTRINE    OF    TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 

TVhich  ought  immediately  to  follow  the  first  sentence— 

"Satan  mecum  coupit  ejusmodi  disputationem." 

So  that  in  English  the  translation  should  be : 
"  Satan  began  with  me  in  my  heart  the  following. disputation." 

As  to  the  quotations  from  the  works  of  other  reformers,  whicVi 
Mr.  Maguire  adduced,  the  places  where  they  may  be  found,  not 
having  been  stated  by  him,  I  may  truly  say  that  they  are  so 
absurd  as  to  carry  their  own  refutation  upon  their  very  face. 

With  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  :  I  have 
shown  that  our  Saviour  did  not  always  speak  literally — that  he 
frequently  employed  figurative  language — that  there  is  a  figure 
in  the  very  context — that  the  Syriac  language  possesses  no  word 
meaning  to  signify,  and  that  therefore  our  Lord  was  under  the 
necessity  of  using  the  auxiliary  verb.  I  observed  that,  if  tran- 
substantiation be  true,  we  can  have  no  proof  of  the  resurrection 
of  Christ — that  it  destroys  the  nature  of  a  sacrament,  and  con- 
tradicts the  scripture  which  asserts,  that  the  body  of  Christ  shall 
not  see  corruption.  I  have  appealed  to  the  Fathers  ;  let  our 
quotations  be  confronted.  There  is  a  suspicion  that  the  Fathers 
have  been  corrupted  by  the  church  of  Rome  ;  but  the  Protes- 
tants possess  no  index  expurgaiorius,  I  would  ask,  what  is  the 
use  of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  ?  Can  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  literally  received  into  the  body,  benefit  the  soul? 
Christ  suffered  in  his  body  on  the  cross,  and  in  that  respect  his 
flesh  has  profited,  from  its  union  with  the  Godhead.  But  did  I 
submit  to  be  a  cannibal,  I  should  yet  have  to  learn,  by  what 
process  an  immaterial  spirit  can  be  benefited  by  a  m.aterial  sub- 
stance. I  appeal  to  your  judgments  ;  which  is  most  in  accord- 
ance with  common  sense,  reason,  scripture,  and  the  character  of 
God, — the  doctrine  which  holds  that  a  man  eats  his  Redeemer, 
or  that  which  teaches,  that  the  soul  is  fed,  not  by  eating  the 
symbols  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  but  by  the  truths  con- 
tained in  the  word  of  God  ?  If  the  early  Christians  beheved 
such  a  doctrine,  I  ask,  would  it  not  have  been  brought  forward 
as  a  charge  against  them  by  anti-Christian  writers? — (Iren. 
Fragm.  ap.  CEcum.  in  1  Pet.  ii,  12.)  Yet  such  a  charge  was 
never  made. 

My  friend  has  accused  me  of  not  being  under  the  influence 
of  moral  principle.  Let  our  lives  be  contrasted,  and  then  will 
it  be  seen  which  of  the  'wo  is  most  influenced  by  Christian  prin- 
ciple. If  Mr.  Maguii  3  would  read  the  works  of  Luther,  he 
would  find,  that  although  Lutner  would  lay  no  other  foimdation 
tnan  that  which  has  been  laid,  which  is  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord, 
yet  he  delighted  to  erect  upon  that  basis  such  a  moral  edifice  aa 
should  be  to  the  praise  and  the  glory  of  the  most  high  God.     I 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  TRANSUBSTANTIATION.    251 

»naintain  that  in  the  New  Testament  isQsvg  is  never  apphed  to 
Christian  ministers  ;  and  I  argue  against  the  Roman  CathoUc 
priesthood  as  St.  Paul  argued  against  that  of  the  Jews. — Heb.  x. 

'•The  law  having  a  shadow  of  the  good  things  to  come,  not  the  very  image 
of  the  things,  by  the  self-same  sacrifices,  which  they  offer  continually  every 
year,  can  never  make  the  comers  thereunto  perfect.  Because  the  worshippers 
once  cleansed  should  have  no  conscience  of  sin  any  longer.  But  in  them 
there  is  made  a  commemoration  of  sins  every  year ;  for  it  is  impossible  that 
virith  the  blood  of  oxen  and  goats  sin  should  be  taken  away." 

Again, 

"And  every  priest,  indeed,  standeth  daily  ministering  and  often  offer- 
ing the  same  sacrifices  which  can  never  take  away  sins;  but  this  man 
offering  one  sacrifice  for  sins,  for  ever  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  from 
hen'^eforth  expecting  until  his  enemies  be  made  his  footstool,  for  by  one  obla- 
tion he  hath  perfected  for  ever  them  that  are  sanctified.  And  the  Holy  Ghost 
also  doth  testify  this  to  us,  for  after  that  he  said,  '  this  is  the  Testament  which 
I  will  make  unto  them  after  those  days,  saith  the  Lord,  I  will  give  my  lawa 
in  their  hearts,  and  on  their  minds  will  I  write  them,  and  their  sins  and  ini- 
quities I  will  remember  no  more.  Now,  when  there  is  a  remission  of  these, 
there  is  no  more  an  oblation  for  sin." 

In  the  same  manner  I  argue,  that  the  daring  repetition  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  impUes,  that  the  great  atonement  on  the  cross 
was  not  all-sufficient — this  is  an  important  subject.  St.  Paul 
plainly  observes,  that  in  the  repetition  of  the  Jewish  sacrifices 
there  was  a  public  acknowledgment  made  that  sin  remained 
unpardoned.  The  Jewish  priests  ofiered  often  the  same  sacri- 
fices, which  can  never  take  away  sin.  The  Roman  Catholic 
priesthood,  in  the  daring  attempt  to  offer  a  sacrifice,  first  pro- 
claim the  sacrifice  of  Christ  as  insufficient ;  and  secondly, 
acknowledge  their  own  as  insufficient,  by  repeating  it.  Mark^ 
the  contrast — 

"  The  Priest  stood  daily  ministering,  and  often  offering  the  same  sacrifices, 
which  can  never  take  away  sin :  but  this  man  offering  one  sacrifice  for  sins 
for  ever  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God,  from  henceforth  expecting,  until  his 
enemies  be  made  his  footstool." 

Why  does  the  Saviour  not  repeat  his  sacrifice?  Because  **by 
ONE  oblation  he  hath  perfected  for  ever  them  that  are  sanctified." 
Wherefore,  after  the  announcement  of  the  new  covenant  the 
Apostle  adds  : 

"Where  there  is  a  remission  of  these,  THERE  IS  NO  MORE  AN 
OBLATION  FOR  SIN." 

The  Church  of  Rome  must  hold  that  the  remission  is  either 
perfect  or  imperfect.  The  latter  I  bring  in  direct  opposition  to 
the  sacred  scriptures, 

"  Their  sins  and  iniquities  I  will  remember  no  moi'eJ^ 

Again,  it  is  written, 

"Nor  yet  that  he  should  offer  himself  o//cn, as  the  high  priest  entereth  into 
tjie  holiest  every  year  with  the  blood  of  others  ;  for  then  he  ought  to  hava 


25Z  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

suffered  often  from  the  beginning  of  the  world  ;  but  now  once  at  the  end 
of  ages,  he  hath  appeared  for  the  destruction  of  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself  j 
and  as  it  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  and  after  that  the  judgment,  so 
also  Christ  was  offered  once  to  exhaust  the  sins  of  many." — (Heb.  ix,  24.) 

There  are  other  passages  to  the  same  effect,  which  show  that 
there  is  but  one  priest,  Christ  Jesus,  God  over  all,  blessed  for 
ever.  Therefore  they  who  pretend  to  offer  sacrifice,  intrude 
upoti  his  office,  and  attempt  to  rob  him  of  his  priesthood.  But 
he  remains  eternally  and  immutably  the  great  High  Priest  of  his 
people. 


Sixth  Day — Wednesday,  April  25. 


SUBJECT. — *'  The  Protestant  Churches  do  not  profess  that 
Unity  which  forms  the  Distinctive  Mark  of  the  True  Church 
of  Christ:' 

Admiral  Oliver  and  Thomas  Wyse,  Esq.,  in  the  Chair. 

Mr.  Maguire  rose,  and  called  upon  Mr.  Pope,  for  proofs  of 
the  existence  of  that  unity  in  the  Protestant  churches,  which 
forms  the  distinctive  mark  of  the  true  church  of  Christ. 

Mr.  Pope  rose,  and  said — Gentlemen,  I  shall  preface  my 
observations  this  day,  with  the  following  remarks  :  If  I  yester- 
day spoke  in  a  manner  apparently  bordering  upon  warmth,  I  beg 
to  assure  you,  that  it  arose  from  excessive  bodily  exhaustion, 
which  obliged  me,  in  order  to  give  utterance  to  my  thoughts, 
unduly  to  strain  and  exert  my  physical  powers. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  called  upon  me  for  proofs  of  that  unity 
which  he  asserts  to  be  a  distinctive  mark  of  the  true  church.  I 
admit  that  no  single  Protestant  communion  constitutes  of  itself 
the  church  of  Christ,  but  that  the  members  of  the  Saviour's 
mystical  body  are  scattered  through  the  various  communities  of 
professing  Christians.  This,  my  opinion  of  the  meaning  of  "  the 
the  church  of  Christ,"  coincides  with  authorities  which  my  friend 
esteems.     St.  Augustin  says  of  the  church, 

"That  house  consists  in  vessels  of  gold  and  silver,  in  precious  stones,  and 
incorruptible  wood ;  and  it  is  to  that  St.  Paul  says,  *  bear  with  one  another  in 
V>ve,  keeping  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace;*  and  again,  *the 
tei.  nle  of  God  is  holy,  which  temple  ye  are.'  It  consists  in  the  good,  in  tht 
faithful,  in  the  holy  servants  of  God  spread  every  where,  joined  together  in  a 
spiritual  unity  by  the  communion  of  the  same  sacraments,  whether  they  know 
one  ariother  by  sight  or  whether  they  do  not.  But  as  for  the  others,  they  are 
so  in  the  hoiue  as  not  at  all  to  belong  to  the  structure  of  the  house,  and  tliey 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  263 

tre  not  in  that  society  that  is  faithful  in  peace  and  righteousness.  They  are 
as  chaff  amid  the  good  corn  ;  and  we  cannot  deny  that  they  are  in  the  house, 
since  the  Apostle  says,  'that  there  are  in  the  house  not  only  vessels  of  gold 
and  silver,  but  vessels  also  of  vi^ood  and  earth — but  one  to  honor,  the  other  to 
dishonor." — August,  de  Baptis.  Contra.  Donat.  lib.  vii,  cap.  51. 

You  have  a.ready  perceived  that  the  quotations  which  I  brought 
forward  on  ha  first  day  of  the  meeting,  coincide  with  this  view 
of  ^e  word  Church.     Clemens  of  Alexandria  says  : 

"The  ancient  Catholic  church  is  but  one  only,  which  assembles  m  th« 
unity  of  one  only  faith,  by  the  will  of  one  only  God,  and  the  ministry  of  rne 
only  Lord — all  those  who  are  before  obtained,  that  is  to  say,  whoni  God  has 
predestinated  to  be  just,  having  known  them  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world." — Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  hb.  vii. 

Origen  says,  in  explaining  these  words,  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and 
upon  this  rock  will  I  build  my  church." — 

"  The  church  consists  of  all  those  who  are  perfect,  and  are  full  of  those 
words,  thoughts,  and  actions  which  lead  to  blessedness." 

In  Matt,  xvi,  St.  Ambrose  says, 

"God  called  his  tabernacle  Bethlehem,  because  the  church  of  the  righteous 
is  his  tabernacle ;  and  there  is  a  mystery  in  it ;  for  Bethlehem  is  situated 
upon  the  sea  of  Gallilee,  on  the  east  side,  which  signifies  to  us  that  every  soul 
that  is  worthy  to  be  called  the  temple  of  God,  or  the  church,  may  be  built 
upon  the  waves  of  this  world,  but  can  never  be  drowned ;  it  may  be  encoun- 
tered, but  can  never  be  overthrown,  because  it  depresses  and  calms  the  wild 
impetuousness  of  sufferings.  It  looks  upon  the  shipwrecks  of  others,  while 
itself  is  safe  from  danger,  always  ready  to  receive  the  illumination  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  to  rejoice  under  his  rays." — De  Abrah.  Patr.  Lib.  1,2.  cap.  3. 

And  further,  elsewhere,  he  says  expressly  : 

"  That  as  the  saints  are  the  members  of  Jesus  Christ,  so  the  wicked  are 
the  members  of  the  devil." — In  Psalm  xxxv. 

St.  Jerome  says : 

**  The  church,  ivhich  is  the  assembly  of  all  the  saints,  is  called  in  the  scripture 
the  pillar  and  ground  of  truth,  because  she  has  in  Jesus  Christ  an  eternal 
firmne&  i," — In.  Job  cap.  xxvi. 

Again,  in  the  exposition  of  the  Canticles,  he  says  : 

'*  That  the  church  is  the  assembly  of  all  the  saints,  and  that  she  is  brought  in 
speaking  in  the  Canticles,  as  if  all  the  saints  were  but  one  person." — ^Cant 
Horn,  1. 

And  even  the  author  of  the  Commentary  on  tha  Psalms, 
ascribed  to  St.  Jerome,  explaining  these  words  of  the  prophet, 
"  I  will  drive  away  from  the  city  of  the  Lord  all  workers  of 
iniquity,"  says : 

"  The  city  of  the  Lord  is  the  church  of  the  saints,  the  congregation  of  th£ 
hist." — In  Paal.  ci. 

You  will  perceive  from  the  quotations,  whether  Mr.  Maguire'a 
view  of  the  word  "  church"  coincides  with  that  entertained  by 
Christian  xntiqufty. 

221 


254  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

Permit  me  to  observe,  that  unity,  abstractedly  considered,  is 
not  a  distinctive  feature  of  the  church  of  Christ.  There  may  be 
unity  in  error,  as  well  as  unity  in  truth.  The  unity  which  is  to 
distinguish  the  church  of  Christ,  consists  in  holding  the  essen- 
tials of  sound  doctrine.  In  order  to  explain  my  meaning,  permit 
lie  to  read  part, of  the  2d  psalm  : 

"The  kings  of  the  earth  stood  up,  and  the  princes  met  together  against 
the  Lord,  and  against  his  Christ." — v.  2. 

Here  we  read  of  unity ;  but  need  I  say,  that  it  was  unity 
founded  on  error.  If  mere  unity  be  the  essential  characteristic 
of  the  true  church,  the  Jewish  church  will  boast  that  it  possesses 
this  mark  :  she  will  say,  '  Christians  are  divided  into  many  sects 
and  parties  :  there  is  the  church  of  Rome,  with  her  Dominicans 
and  Franciscans,  her  Jesuits  and  Jansenists ;  there  are  the 
Protestant  communions,  differing  on  points  of  external  disci- 
pline— the  Episcopahans,  Presbyterians,  Independents,  and 
l«<iptists.  Christians  cannot,  therefore,  constitute  the  true  church. 
^\e  are  united;  hence  we  are  the  true  church.'  Again:  the 
Mahomedan,  looking  at  those  who  possess  the  sacred  scriptures, 
perceives  that  the  Jews  receive  but  a  portion  of  them,  and  that 
Christians  receive  the  New  Testament  in  addition,  and  that  both 
differ  on  various  points  ;  he  will  conclude,  that,  if  unity  be  a 
mark  of  the  true  church,  the  Jews  and  C-hristians  cannot  con- 
stitute it :  "  my  church,"  he  will  say,  "  is  united,  therefore  it  is 
the  true  church."  Again  :  may  not  the  Hindoo,  on  this  princi 
pie,  when  he  sees  the  Jews  receiving  only  the  Old  Testament, 
the  Christians  both  Testaments,  and  the  Mahomedan,  though 
acknowledging  Christ  to  be  a  prophet  sent  by  heaven,  denying 
his  divinity — declare,  "if  unity  be  the  mark  of  the  true  church, 
their's  is  not  the  true  church,  but  mine  is."  The  Infidel,  too, 
may  congratulate  himself,  when  he  perceives  that  those  who 
profess  to  believe  in  revealed  religion  differ  so  widely.  May 
he  not  say,  "  if  unity  be  a  mark  of  the  true  church,  believers  in 
what  they  call  a  revelation  do  not  possess  that  mark  ;  therefore 
they  are  not  the  true  church ;  but  we  are  united  :  therefore  we 
are  the  true  church."  And  lastly,  the  Atheist  may  step  forward 
and  observe,  'here  are  Jews,  Christians,  Mahomedans,  Hindoos, 
and  Infidels,  all  professing  to  believe  in  a  preternatural  power, 
and  yet  widely  differing  from  each  other :  if  unity,  therefore,  be 
tin  essential  mark  of  the  true  church,  the  Atheistical  church  is 
tbat  church." 

You  perceive,  that  mere  unity  is  not  the  distinctive  mark  of 
the  true  church  ;  but  unity  in  sound  doctrine.  Here  the  whole 
argument  turns  ;  and  I  boldly  assert,  that  whatever  unity  is  to 
be  found  in  the  church  of  Rome,  is  i  unity,  not  of  sound  doc^ 
trine,  but  of  erroneous  doctrinis. 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  255 

Hear  the  Fathers  upon  this  point,  that  real  unity  consists  in 
iiound  doctrine  : 

"  They  do  not,"  says  Ambrose,  "possess  the  inheritance  of  Peter,  who  d# 
not  hold  the  faith  of  Peter." — De  Poenit.  cap.  6. 

Tertullian  observes, 

"True  unity  is  the  consa  iguinity  of  faith  and  doctrine." — De  Praescript, 
adv.  Haer.  cap.  33.. 

Mr.  Maguire  asserted,  that  the  church  of  Rome  did  differ  upon 
matters  not  essential,  but  that  its  unity  consisted  in  essential 
doctrines. — Now  I  think  essential  and  fundamental  doctrines  are 
synonymous  terms.  What  is  the  opinion  of  Delahogue  upon  this 
distinction  between  fundamental  and  non-fundamental  articles  ? 

"  Jam  manifestum  est  distinctionem  articulorum  fundamentaliura  et  nor 
fundamentalium  merum  esse  commentum,  scripturis  evidentur  repugnans, 
toti  tradition!  ignotum,  et  in  desperatae  causae  praesidium  a  JurioBO  excogita- 
tum."— P.  16. 

"  It  is  now  manifest,  that  the  distinction  between  fundamental  and  non- 
fundamental  articles  is  a  mere  comment,  evidently  opposed  to  scripture, 
unknown  to  tradition  altogether,  and  invented  by  Juriaeus,  as  the  last  re- 
source of  a  desperate  cause." 

I  wonder  whether  Mr.  Maguire  is  at  unity  with  Delahogue  on 
this  subject ;  and  we  know  that  Delahogue  is  the  class-book  of 
Maynooth.  We  assert,  as  a  positive  matter  of  fact,  that  all  the 
great  Protestant  communions  in  their  published  confessions,  are 
agreed  on  the  essential  truths  of  the  Christian  system.  First, 
as  to  the  head  of  the  church — they  hold  that  Christ  is  head  over 
all  things  to  his  church,  God  over  all,  blessed  for  ever.  They 
are  agreed  upon  the  standard  of  faith — the  Bible,  and  the  Biblo. 
alone,  is  the  religion  of  Protestants. 

I  hold  in  my  hand  a  book  entitled  "  Corpus  et  Suntagma 
Confessionum,"  &c.  A  Body  and  Collation  of  the  Confessions 
of  Faith,  which  were  authenticated,  and  edited  in  the  name  of 
the  Churches  in  different  kingdoms  and  nations,  published  in 
the  most  famous  convention,  and  approved  of  by  public  autho- 
rity," &c.  1512. 

Any  gentleman  who  pleases  may  examine  the  work  ;  he  shall 
^lave  it  for  the  purpose.  From  it  he  will  discover,  that  the  great 
Protestant  communions  coincide  on  the  canon  of  scripture,  in 
their  views  of  the  guilt  and  natural  depravity  of  man,  and  on 
that  great  fundamental  truth,  that  the  sinner  is  justified  by  faith 
only,  in  the  atonement  of  the  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, — 
that  they  harmonize  on  the  doctrine  of  the  necessity  of  a  change 
of  heart,  ere  the  soul  'can  be  admitted  into  the  kingdom  of 
glory — that  they  accord  in  the  scriptural  truth,  that  the  faith  of 
the  gospel  opens  the  affections,  purifies  the  inmost  recesses  of 
the  soul,  emancipates  the  believer  from  the  overwhelming  influ- 
ence of  the  world,  binds  him  by  the  strongest  moral  obligations^ 


250  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

in  a  word,  consecrates  him  to  be  a  vessel  meet  for  his  rnaster'a 
use.  These  are  the  great  essential  truths  on  which  all  real 
Protestants  agree.  In  support  of  these  fundamental  tenets^,  I 
appeal  to  that  blessed  volume  in  w^hich,  to  use  the  words  of 
Bellarmine, 

"  All  things  necessary  for  all  are  written  by  the  Apostles." 
"  Dico  ilia  omnia  scripta  esse  ab  Apostolis  quae  sunt  omnibus  necessaria, 
&:." — De  Verho  non  Scripto,  Lib.  iv,  c,  11. 

To  the  Apostolic  records  I  appeal,  in  support  of  these  doc- 
li  iiies ;  and  to  the  printed  confessions  of  faith,  in  demonstration 
that  on  essential  doctrines  Protestant  communions  are  found  to 
accord.  Having  made  these  few  observations  on  the  unity 
subsisting  between  the  Protestant  communions,  I  throw  back 
upon  my  friend  the  charge  of  want  of  unity  in  his  own  church. 
1  assert  that  his  church  has  not  unity  in  reference  to  the  standard 
of  faith,  in  reference  to  doctrine,  and  various  other  points — to 
which  I  shall  presently  take  the  liberty  of  calling  your  attention* 

My  friend  will  tell  you,  doubtless,  that  his  church  possesses 
one  head,  as  the  source  and  centre  of  unity — that  the  Pope,  as 
successor  to  St.  Peter,  is  supreme.  But  it  will  devolve  on  him 
to  prove,  that  Peter  was  the  supreme  Apostle,  and  that  the  Popes 
are  his  successors.  I  shall  assign  my  reasons  for  the  opinion, 
that  Peter  did  not  possess  jurisdiction  over  the  other  Apostles. 
Peter  was  specially  the  Apostle  of  the  Jews,  and  was  not 
appointed  to  watch  over  the  Gentile  church.  Paul  was  the 
Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  and  if  any  on  that  ground  could  lay 
claim  to  supremacy,  the  Apostle  Paul  was  the  individual.  Mark 
the  absurdity  into  which  this  doctrine  of  Peter's^upremacy  would 
lead  us.  St.  John  survived  Peter  about  twenty  years.  If  this 
prerogative  therefore  belongs  to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  we  should 
nave  an  uninspired  man,  whether  Linus,  or  Clement  exercising 
jurisdiction  over  an  inspired  Apostle? 

The  Apostles,  permit  me  to  add,  never  recognized  Peter  as 
supreme.  At  the  last  supper  we  find  them  disputing  which  of 
them  should  be  the  greatest.  Had  they  conceived  that  the 
Saviour,  in  the  passage,  "  Thou  art  Peter,"  &c,  had  conferred 
superiority  upon  him,  is  it  likely  that  such  a  dispute  could  have 
arisen  amongst  them  ?  And  if  the  Saviour  had  conferred  any 
such  authority  upon  Peter,  would  he  not  have  referred  the 
Apostles  to  his  previous  decision,  in  order  to  terminate  the  dis- 
putation :  but  he  simply  inculcates  upon  them  a  lesson  of  humility 
(Luke,  xxii,  24.)  When  the  Apostles  had  found  that  Samaria 
had  received  the  Word  of  God,  "they  sent  unto  them  Peter  and 
John."— (Acts,  viii,  14.)  The  inferior  confessedly  is  sent  by 
the  superior,  and  therefore  neither  Peter  nor  John  were  tibove 
the  other  Apostles      At  the  first  assembly  in  Jerusalem,  though 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  257 

Peter  and  James  both  delivered  their  opinions,  yet  the  opinion 
of  James,  and  not  that  of  Peter,  was  received  by  the  assembly. 
(Acts,  XV,  li.)  And  in  the  letter  which  was  subsequently 
written,  ther^  is  no  mention  whatever  made  of  Peter.  The 
decree  thus  commences, 

"The  Apostles  and  ancient  br~  »iren,  to  the  brethren  of  the  Gentiles."— 
vi.  33. 

The  Apostle  Paul  talks  ol  schisms — 

"  Every  one  of  you  saith,  I  am  of  Paul,  I  of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Cephas." — 
1  Cor.  i,  12. 

True,  you  will  say,  it  was  wrong  to  assert  that  they  were 
under  Paul  or  Apollos  :  but,  I  ask,  what  think  you  of  "  I  am  of 
Cephas  or  Peter  1"  /  ask,  if  Peter  was  the  supreme  apostle, 
would  Paul  have  condemned  the  Corinthian  Christians  for  putting 
themselves  under  the  standard  of  the  supreme  head?  Further — if 
to  have  one  earthly  head  be  the  essential  characteristic  of  the 
true  Church,  the  Church  in  the  primitive  times  did  not  possess 
this  centre  of  unity.  No  bishop  assumed  the  title  of  supreme 
until  Boniface  III,  in  tho  year  606.  Nay — this  centre  of  unity 
has  been  the  pregnant  source  of  divisions  in  the  church  of  Rome. 
We  read  of  more  than  twenty  schisms  arising  from  the  Popedom. 
At  one  period  we  find  Pope  fulminating  against  Pope  for  a  series 
of  years.  Stephen  VI,  abrogated  the  decrees  of  Pope  Formosus, 
his  predecessor,  drew  his  body  out  of  his  sepulchre,  cut  off  his 
fingers,  because  they  had  been  used  in  ordination,  and  threw 
them  into  the  Tiber  ;  alleging  as  a  reason,  that  he  obtained 
Peter's  chair  by  perjury.  Romanus,  the. next  Pope,  abrogated 
all  the  decrees  of  his  predecessor,  Stephen ;  and  as  Platina 
observes,  this  quarrel  had  such  an  injurious  influence,  that  every 
following  Pope  infringed,  or  wholly  abrogated  the  acts  of  the 
foregoing. 

Again — the  church  of  Rome  is  split  on  the  subject  of  the  tem- 
poral power  of  the  Popes,  also  on  infallibility.  What  shall  we 
say  of  the  heretical  heads  which  have  presided  over  the  church 
of  Rome.  Pope  Honorius  was  deposed  for  heresy  by  a  general 
council.  It  is,  indeed,  a  daring  assumption  on  the  part  of  man, 
to  take  on  him  an  office  which  is  the  exclusive  prerogative  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  no  earthhj  being,  however  extensive 
his  information,  correct  his  principles,  and  mighty  his  intellectual 
powers  may  be,  should  dare  to  assume,  an  office  which  no  combi* 
nation  of  talents,  howev-er  exalted,  could  qualify  him  to  discharge. 

Mr.  Maguire. — You  have  heard,  gentlemen,  perhaps  the 
best  defence  which  could  possibly  be  set  up  for  tne  Protestant 
churches  As  to  unity,  I  contend,  that  it  is  required  by  scrip- 
ture as  a  mark  of  that  peace  which  Christ  bequeathed  to  his 

22* 


258  THE  Vant  of  unity  of 

followers — "  My  peace  I  leave  with  you — my  peace  I  give 
you," — and  as  a  token  of  that  holiness  which  our  Lord  intended 
should,  mtil  the  consummation  of  ages,  characterize  the  true 
church  upon  earth.  You  have  heard  the  most  ingenious  defence 
which  could  be  offered  for  the  absence  of  all  unity  ;  and  you 
cannot  have  failed  to  observe  that  Mr.  Pope  has  employed  his 
usual  tact  on  this  occasion.  I  had  put  him  on  his  defence  as 
to  a  certain  point  of  doctrine.  I  had  left  the  ground  clear  for 
him.  But,  instead  of  confining  himself  to  the  maintenance  of 
his  own  principles  on  this  particular  point,  and  to  an  anticipation 
of  my  objections,  he  turns  upon  me,  and,  as  has  been  his  inva- 
riable practice,  puts  me  upon  my  defence.  In  that  respect  Mr. 
Pope  deserves  much  credit  for  his  ingenuity.  I  had  hoped  thai 
the  discussion  would  terminate  this  day  with  good  humour  and 
good  feeling.  Some  expressions  dropped  from  my  opponent 
yesterday,  which  might  as  well  have  been  spared.  In  stating 
my  arguments  as  to  Mr.  Pope's  principles,  I  confined  myself  to 
the  proof  their  inconsistency  with  the  moral  precepts  of  the 
gospel.  Though  I  took  care  that  my  arguments  as  to  morality 
should  be  confined  to  the  principles,  and  not  addressed  to  the 
individual,  my  opponent  has  in  return  made  personal  allusions 
to  my  moral  character.  This  I  will  say,  that  the  comparison 
which  my  friend,  Mr.  Pope,  has  drawn  between  his  moral  char- 
acter and  mine,  was  not  provoked  by  any  observation  that  had 
fallen  from  me.  I  would  not,  however,  shrink  from  such  an 
investigation  at  any  time,  that  it  might  be  shown  to  be  calculated 
to  serve  any  good  or  useful  purpose.  I  have  endeavoured 
through  life,  though,  indeed,  I  cannot  lay  claim  to  the  title  of 
**  saint,"  to  square  my  conduct  agreeably  to  the  maxims  of  the 
gospel;  and  I  believe  I  may  say,  that  in  the  habits  of  social 
intercourse,  neither  my  Protestant  nor  Catholic  friends  have  had 
any  thing  to  complain  of  on  my  part.  Mr.  Pope  has  told  me, 
and  he  laid  great  stress  on  the  observation,  that  there  is  no  such 
expression  in  the  New  Testament  as  legsug,  signifying  a  sacri- 
ficing priest. 

Mr.  Pope. — What  I  said  was,  that  it  remains  to  be  proved, 
that  the  word  le^evg  is  employed  in  the  New  Testament,  to  de- 
signate a  minister  of  the  New  Testament. 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  beg  to  refer  you  to  the  fifth  chapter  of  the 
Apocalypse  of  St.  John.  Here  the  Apostle  describes  a  book 
which  he  saw  lying  at  the  right  hand  of  him,  who  sat  upon  the 
throne,  sealed  with  seven  seals — he  also  saw  a  mighty  an)0[ol 
«vho  exclaimed  with  a  loud  voice — 

"  Who  is  worthy  to  open  the  book  and  to  break  the  seals  ?" 


THE  PROTECTANT  CHURCHES.  259 

And  no  person  could  be  found  either  in  heaven  or  on  earth, 
6,  under  the  earth,  to  open  the  book,  or  look  into  it.  The 
e^^ngelist  then  proceeds  to  say  that  he  wept  much,  because 
there  was  none  found  worthy,  ehher  to  open  the  book,  or  to 
look  at  it.     And  one  of  the  elders  said  to  him — 

"  Weep  not,  behold  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Juda  and  the  root  of  David, 
prevaileth  to  open  the  book  and  to  break  its  seven  seals." 

In  the  8th  verse,  he  says — that  when  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of 
Juda,  (meaning  Christ)  had  opened  the  book,  the  four  animals 
and  the  four  and  twenty  elders  prostrated  themselves  before  the 
Lamb,  saying — 

"  Thou  art  worthy,  O  Lord,  to  receive  the  book,  and  to  break  its  seals, 
because  thou  hast  been  slain,  and  hast  redeemed  us  unto  God  in  thy  biood, 
of  every  tribe,  and  tongue,  and  people,  and  nation,  and  thou  hast  made  us  a 
kingdom  and  priests  and  we  will  reign  upon  the  earth." 

I  now  wish  it  to  be  remarked,  that  the  persons  who  are  pre- 
\iously  styled  IlQBa^vTSQoi, — Presbyters — are  in  the  tenth  verse 
styled  l6Qet>,  translated  by  St.  Jerome,  Sacerdotes — the  Vulgate 
translation  of  the  tenth  verse  is — "  Et  fecisti  nos  Deo  nostro 
regnum  et  Sacerdotes ;  et  regnabimus  super  terram."  Here  the 
four  and  twenty  elders,  who  are  called  in  the  fourth  verse  of  the 
foregoing  chapter,  IIqbo^vibqoi^  and  who  are  said  to  have  been 
clothed  in  white  vestments,  give  glory  to  God  that  he  had  made 
them  priests,  as  St.  Jerome  renders  it,  and  that  they  will  reign 
upon  the  earth.  Now  if  these  had  not  been  priests  of  the  new 
law  how  could  they  say,  "  we  will  reign  upon  the  earth."  But, 
as  priests  of  the  new  law,  the  expression  was  reasonable,  as  they 
had  ruled  and  are  still  ruling  by  their  representative  successors. 
It  is  admitted  that  i^eoevg  is  applied  to  them,  and  I  have  shown 
that  they  must  have  been  priests  of  the  new  law. 

Mr.  Pope  laid  much  stress  on  the  fact  that  our  Lord  spoke  to 
his  disciples  at  Capernaum  in  the  Syriac  language,  and  that,  as 
there  is  no  word  in  that  language  tantamount  to  "  represent," 
the  verb  "  w"  is  employed  to  convey  the  meaning  of  represent, 
I  beg  to  remind  my  friend  Mr.  Pope,  that  he  has  fallen  into  a 
notable  error  on  this  point — he  should  have  borne  in  his  recol- 
lection, that  although  our  Lord  (who  never  wrote  any)  then 
spohe  in  the  Syriac  tongue,  the  evangelist  wrote  his  gospel  in  the 
Greek  language,  which  is  not  deficient  in  a  word  signifying  "  io 
represent,''^  Whatever  question  then  may  be  raised  relative  to 
the  language  in  which  our  Saviour  spoke,  his  words  have  been 
transcribed  into  Greek,  and  I  suppose  Mr.  Pope  will  not  accuse 
the  evangelists  of  misrepresenting  J esws  Christ.  Mr.  Pope  also 
formed  an  argument  touching  the  ancient  liturgies  in  the  Syriac 
tongue.  What  is  the  fact  1  Every  day  in  the  year  at  St.  Peter's 
in  Rome,  mass  is  celebrated  in  the  Syriac,  but  the  words  of  the 


260  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

institution  of  the  sacrament  are  retained  in  the  original  Gretk — 
such  was  their  great  respect  and  awfui  veneration  for  the  worda 
of  the  institution. 

I  shall  endeavour  to  follow  Mr.  Pope  through  the  various 
observations  in  which  he  has  indulged.  I  have  taken  my  proofs 
from  scripture  and  from  the  Fathers  of  the  third,  fourth,  and  fifth 
ages  of  the  church.  I  have  sustained  no  doctrine  which  I  have 
not  clearly  proved  to  be  founded  on  scripture.  You  will  not 
fail  to  remark  that  Mr.  Pope  has  appealed  but  to  very  few  texts, 
and  whether  those  which  he  has  quoted,  be  equally  strong  and 
clear,  and  equally  apphcable  as  those  adduced  by  me,  I  shall 
leave  to  you  and  to  the  world  to  decide.  In  the  tenth  chapter 
of  St,  John,  verse  16,  we  read : 

"  And  other  sheep  I  have  that  are  not  of  this  fold :  them  also  I  must  bring, 
and  they  shall  hear  my  voice,  and  there  shall  be  made  one  fold  and  one  shepherd.'''* 

It  is  plain  that  the  idea  of  one  fold  signifies  that  all  the  sheep 
arc  to  be  kept  under  the  control  of  one  shepherd.  Perhaps, 
this  may  not  be  the  interpretation  put  upon  the  passage  by  Mr. 
Pope's  private  judgment,  but  it  is  in  my  opinion  the  clear  and 
obvious  meaning  of  the  text.  In  the  seventeenth  chapter  of 
*^ohn,  verse  20,  21,  our  Saviour  says ; 

"  And  not  for  them  only  do  I  pray,  but  for  those  also  who  through  their 
word  shall  beheve  in  me ;  that  they  may  all  be  one  as  thou.  Father,  in  me, 
and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also  may  be  one  in  us  j  that  tlie  world  may  believe 
that  thou  hast  sent  me." 

If  the  unity  which  Christ  conferred  upon  his  church  be  com- 
pared, as  it  here  is,  by  Christ  himself,  to  the  unity  which  exists 
between  him  and  his  heavenly  Father,  it  evidently  follows  that 
such  unity  can  scarcely  be  exceeded.  In  Romans,  xv,  6  and  6, 
"WG  read, 

"Now  the  God  of  patience  and  of  comfort  grant  you  to  be  of  one  mind,  ont 
towards  another,  according  to  Jesus  Christ ;  that  with  one  mind,  and  with 
wne  mouth,  you  may  glorify  God  and  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

In  the  same  chapter,  verses  16  and  17,  we  read, 

"  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  to  mark  them  who  cause  dissensions,  and 
offend  contrary  to  the  doctrine  which  you  have  learned ;  and  to  avoid  them." 

In  the  1st  Corinthians,  1st  chapter,  10th  Terse,  we  read, 

"Now  I  beseech,  you,  brethren,  that  you  all  speak  the  same  thing,  and 
that  there  be  no  schisms  among  you ;  but  that  you  be  perfect  in  the  smnu 
mind,  and  in  the  same  judgments." 

You  will  observe  that  the  Apostle  makes  no  distincticen  be- 
tween schism  in  doctrine,  and  schisms  in  discipline. 

"Careful  to  keep  the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace — one  body, 
and  one  spirit;  as  you  are  all  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling.  One  Lord, 
one  faith,  one  baptism.  One  God,  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above  all,  and 
through  all,  and  in  us  all." — Ephes.  iv,  31,  5,  6. 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  261 

'  Let  us,  therefore,  as  many  as  are  perfect,  be  thus  minded ;  nevertheless 
^hereunto  we  are  already  arrived,  thst  we  be  of  the  same  mind  ;  let  us  also 
continue  in  the  same  rule." — Phil,  iii,  15,  16. 

Mark  the  following  words  of  the  great  Apostle  of  the  Gen- 
tiles, in  his  epistle  to  Titus  iii,  10 — 

"  A  man  that  is  a  heretic  after  the  first  and  second  admonition,  avoid  ; 
knowing  that  he,  that  is  such  an  one,  is  subverted  and  sinneth,  being  con- 
demned by  his  private  judgment — proprio  judicio  condemnatus." 

"  But  if  any  man  seem  to  be  contentious^  we  have  no  such  custom,  nor  the 
church  of  God."— 1  Cor.  xi,  15. 

Again, 

"Follow  peace  with  all  men,  without  which  no  man  shall  see  God." — 
Heb.  xii,  14. 

I  have  now  laid  before  you  direct  and  positive  texts  of  scrip- 
ture on  the  subject  of  unity,  and  I  shall  leave  them  for  the  pre- 
sent, without  any  commentary,  to  make  the  due  impression  upon 
the  judgments  of  the  candid  and  the  impartial. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  the  testimonies  of  the  Fathers  on  the 
subject.  I  shall  commence  at  the  earliest  era,  with  Saints 
Ignatius  and  Clement ;  the  latter  was'^a  disciple  and  coadjutor 
of  the  Apostles,  as  he  is  styled  by  St.  Paul  to  the  Phillippians 
(iv,  3.)  Ignatius,  whom  I  shall  first  quote,  was  the  second 
bishop  of  Antioch,  after  St.  Peter,  and  governed  that  church  for 
forty  years,  and  died  a  martyr,  under  the  emperor  Trajan.  St. 
Ignatius,  in  his  epistle  to  the  people  of  Magnesia,  having  recom- 
mended them  to  preserve  concord  among  themselves,  and  to 
submit  to  their  superiors,  as  he  does  indeed  in  all  his  epistles, 
proceeds  to  say, 

"  Avoiding  heterodox  opinions  and  useless  fables,  labour  to  be  strengthened 
in  the  doctrines  of  the  Lord  and  of  the  Apostles,  in  order  that  you  may  pros- 
per in  all  things,  in  body  and  spirit,  in  faith  and  charity ;  together  with  your 
respectable  bishops,  the  united  college  of  priests,  and  the  holy  deacons.  Be 
submissive  to  the  bishops  and  to  one  another,  as  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  the 
fleshy  was  to  his  Father,  and  the  Apostles  to  Christ,  and  to  the  Father,  and 
the  Holy  Spirit;  that  your  union  be  in  body  and  spirit." — Ep,  ad  Magnes.  inter 
P.  P.  Apost.  tome  ii,  p.  21.     Ed.  Amsteladami^  1724. 

Again, 

"  1  conjure  you  to  use  only  Christian  food,  and  to  refrain  from/oreig^i  xveed, 
which  is  heresy.  Guard  yourselves  from  such,  which  you  will  do,  if  you  be 
not  puffed  up,  but  remain  inseparably  united  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  your  bishop, 
and  the  ordinances  of  the  Apostles.  He  who  is  within  the  altar  is  clean ;  but 
he  who  is  without,  that  is  without  the  bishop^  and  the  priests,  and  the  deacons. 
is  not  clean." — {Ep.  ad  Trallian'os,  p.  23.) 

Again, 

"  He  who  corrupts  the  faith  of  God,  for  which  Christ  suflfered,  the  samo 
Deing  defiled,  shall  go  into  unquenchable  fire,  as  shall  he  that  heareth  him." — • 
Ep.  ad  Ephes.  p.  15. 

"As  children  of  light  and  truth  avoid  the  divisions  of  unity,  and  the  bad 
doctrines  of  heretics.  Where  the  shepherd  is,  do  you,  like  sheep  follow."— 
Ep.a'Philad.^.  31. 


ThE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

St.  Clement,  the  disciple  of  St.  John  the  evangelist,  and  coad- 
jutor of  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians, 
chapter  46,  (Inter  P.  P.  Apostolicos,  tonne  i,  page  174,  Edit. 
Amstelosdami,  1724,)  has  the  following  pertinent  remarks : 

"  Why  are  these  contentions  and  schisms  among  you?  Have  we  not  one 
God  and  one  Christ?  And  one  spirit  and  one  calling  in  Christ  ?  Why  do 
we  divide  and  sever  the  members  of  Christ,  and  raise  sedition  among  the 
body  ?  Your  schisms  pervert  many ;  it  has  cast  many  into  dejection  ;  many 
it  has  caused  to  doubt,  and  afflicted  us  all.  Notwithstanding  this,  you 
desist  not." 

St.  Clement,  you  will  also  observe,  makes  no  distinction  what- 
ever between  schism  in  doctrine  and  in  discipline,  but  bestows 
indiscriminate  reprobation  upon  schism  of  every  description. 

Hegisippus,  who  was  a  native  of  Palestine,  and  belonged  to 
the  church  of  Jerusalem,  and  resided  near  tw^enty  years,  at  Rome, 
and  of  whom  St.  Jerome  says,  that  he  lived  near  to  the  Apos- 
tolic times,  and  compiled  a  history  in  five  books,  of  jill  that  had 
passed  from  the  death  of  our  Lord  to  his  own  days,  (a  few  frag- 
ments of  which  are  preserved  by  Eusebius,)  and  who  died  about 
the  year  180,  has  the  following  passages,  as  preserved  by  Euse- 
bius in  his  History,  (I  shall  give  the  words  of  the  historian  him- 
self, as  they  are  related  of  Hegisippus) — 

"In  the  books  which  have  come  down  to  us,  Hegisippus  relates  of  himself, 
that  as  he  went  to  Rome,  he  visited  many  bishops,  and  heard  from  all,  one 
and  the  same  doctrine.  They  called  the  church  (says  he)  a  virgin,  because 
as  yet  she  had  not  been  corrupted  by  vain  opinions.  From  the  heretics  who 
then  rose,  came  false  Christs,  false  prophets,  and  false  Apostles;  and  these, 
introducing  counterfeit  doctrine  against  God,  and  against  his  Christ,  severed 
the  unity  of  the  church." — ApuaEuseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  iv,  c.  22,  p.  16L 
Ed.  Cantabrig.  1720. 

IrensBus, 

"  The  church  extended  to  the  boundaries  of  the  earth,  received  her  faith 
from  the  Apostles,  and  their  disciple«.  Having  received  it ;  she  carefuKy 
retains  it,  as  if  dwelling  in  one  house,  as  possessing  one  love,  and  one  heart*, 
the  same  faith  she  delivers  and  teaches  with  one  accord,  and  as  if  giflted.with 
one  tongue.  For  though  in  the  world  there  be  various  modes  of  speech,  the 
tradition  of  doctrine  is  one  and  the  same.  In  the  churches  of  Germany,  in 
those  of  Spain  and  Gaul,  in  those  of  the  East,  of  Egypt,  and  of  Africa,  and 
in  the  middle  regions,  is  the  same  belief^— the  same  teaching.  For  as  the 
world  is  enlightened  by  one  sim,  so  does  the  preaching  of  one  faith  enlighten 
all  men  that  are  willing  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  truth.  Nor  among  the 
pastors  of  the  church  does  he  that  is  eloquent  deliver  other  doctrine,  for  no 
one  is  above  his  master — nor  he  that  is  weak  in  speech,  diminish  the  truths 
of  tradition.  Faith  being  one,  cannot  be  effected  by  the  power  or  the  want 
of  utterance." — Adv.  Heres.  lib.  i,  c.  ii,  iii,  p.  45,  46.  Ed.  Oxon.  1702. 

And, 

"God  placed  in  his  church,  Apostles,  prophets,  doctors :  and  the  whole 
operation  of  the  spirit  of  which  they  do  not  partake,  who  are  not  united  to  the 
church;  but  by  their  own  bad  designs  and  actions,  they  deprive  themselves 
of  life.  For  where  the  church  is,  there  is  the  Spirit  of  God ;  and  where  this 
Spirit  is,  there  is  the  church  and  all  grace ;  the  Spirit  is  truth." — Ibidem,  lib, 
iii,  c.  40,  p.  266.    See  also  Lib.  iv,  c.  62. 


YIIE    PROTESTANT    CIIURCIIEa  265 

In  the  days  of  Irenaeus  commenced  the  Quarto  Deciman  dis- 
pute. The  question  regarded  the  time  of  celebrating  the  feast 
of  Easter,  and  was  finally  decided  against  the  churches  of  Asia 
Minor,  by  the  council  of  Nice.  This  serious  controversy  ex- 
torted from  the  holy  Father  the  pathetic  and  anxious  language 
quoted  above,  by  which  he  besought  them  to  maintain  not  only 
unity  in  faith,  but  unity  of  disciphne  also.  It  further  proves  the 
solicitude  of  the  church  to  maintain  uniformity  of  practice. 

Tertuilian,  De  Prescrip.  c.  xx,  p.  234. — 

"  The  Apostles  having  received  the  promised  assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
first  preached  the  faith  in  Judaea,  and  planted  churches,  whence,  going  into 
the  whole  world,  they  proclaimed  the  same  doctrine  to  the  nations,  and  foun- 
ded churches.  Therefore  these,  so  many  and  so  great  churches,  are  one  from 
that  one  of  the  Apostles,  from  which  are  all.  And  thus  all  are  Apostolic, 
while  all  maintain  the  same  unity." 

And, 

"  There  is  one  faith  to  the  Apostles  and  to  us— one  God — one  Christ — one 
hope — the  same  sacraments.  Let  me  say  it  in  one  word,  we  are  all  onn 
church.  Whatever  belongs  to  any  among  us,  is  also  our  own.  Hoc  nostrum 
est  quodcumque  nostrorum  est." — De  Virg.  Veland,  p.  309. 

St.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  lib.  vii,  Stromat.  No.  17,  p.  899, 
900— 

"  From  what  has  been  said,  I  thin)t  it  manifest  that  there  is  only  one  true 
church,  which  is  alone  ^ndani^  to  \\h\ch  n\\X\\Q  just  properly  belong.  This 
church,  which  is  one,  is  formed  into  one  nature,  which  unity  it  is  the  endea- 
vour of  heretics  to  sever  into  many.  Therefore  we  say,  that  the  ancient 
and  Catholic  church  alone  is  one  in  essence,  in  opinion,  in  origin,  and  in 
excellence,  one  in  faith — Of  this  church,  the  eminence  as  well  as  the  principle 
of  its  construction,  arises  from  unity  ;  by  this  surpassing  all  other  things, 
and  knowing  nothing  like  or  equal  to  itself.  The  doctrine  of  all  the  Apos- 
tles was  one,  as  was  one  all  that  they  delivered." 

He  elsewhere  defines  the  church  to  be — 

*'  A  people  collected  into  one  faith  from  the  Jev/s  and  Gentiles." 

And  afterwards  adds — 

"  Thus  they  both  arrive  at  the  unity  of  faith."— Ibid,  vi,  p.  736,  793. 

Hear  the  emphatic  Origen — 

"  As  they  shall  not  possess  the  kingdom  of  God,  who  have  been  defiled  by 
^  fornication,  other  impurities,  and  the  worship  of  idols,  so  neither  shall  heretics." 
*  Horn,  in  ep.  ad  Tit.  apud  Pamphylum  Apol.  t.  i,  p.  481.     Edit.  Genebradi. 

"  Should  any  one  be  found  not  hastening,  not  betaking  himself  to  the  walled 
cities,  that  is,  shall  not  have  entered  inttF  the  churches  of  God,  but  hava 
remained  without,  he  si  all  perish  in  the  hands  of  the  enemy." — Hom.  v,  in 
Jerem.  t.  iii,  p.  161.     Edit.  Paris,  1733. 

"  Let  no  one  persuade,  no  one  deceive  himself ;  out  of  this  house,  that  is, 
out  of  the  church,  is  no  salvation.  He  that  shall  go  out,  becomes  guilty  ot 
his  own  death." — Hom.  iv,  in  Josue,  t  ii,  p.  404. 

St.  Cyprian,  the  Martyr,  who.  wrote   an  elaborate  work,  pro- 
fessedly upon  the  absolute  necessity  of  Ecclesiastical  Unity,  as 
may  be  seen  in  his  book,  passim,  De  Unitato  Ecclesiae,  p    108 
KdU.  Oxon.  16S2.  et  alibi-    bus  expresses  himself: 


264  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY  OF 

"  The  church  is  one,  widely  extended  by  its  fecundity  ;  as  theie  are  many 
rays  of  light,  but  one  sun  ;  many  branches  of  a  tree,  but  one  root  deeply 
fixed  ;  many  streams  of  water,  but  one  source.  Take  a  ray  from  the  sun  j 
the  unity  of  light  allows  not  division.  Break  a  branch  from  the  tree,  the 
branch  cannot  germinate.  Cut  off  the  stream  from  its  source,  the  stream  dries 
up.  So  the  church  sends  forth  her  rays  over  the  whole  earth  ;  yet  is  the  light 
one,  and  its  unity  is  undivided. 

"  He  that  does  not  hold  this  unity  of  the  church,  can  he  think  that  he  holds 
the  faith  ?  He  that  opposes  and  withstands  the  church,  can  he  trust  that  he 
is  in  the  church  ?  When  the  blessed  Paul  teaches  the  same  thing,  and  shows 
the  sacred  character  of  unity,  saying,  (Ephes.  iv,  4,  5,  6,)  mie  body  and  out 
spirit,  &c  ;    which  unity,  it  'vs  our  duty  firmly  to  hold  and  to  vindicate." 

**  Whosoever  is  separated  from  the  church,  is  joined  to  an  adulteress:  is 
cut  off  from  the  promises  of  the  church.  Who  deserts  the  church  of  Christ, 
obtains  not  the  rewards  of  Christ.  He  is  an  alien  ;  he  is  profane  ;  he  is  an 
enemy.  He  cannot  have  God  for  a  Father,  who  has  not  the  church  for  his 
mother.  If  excluded  from  the  ark  of  Noah,  any  one  might  have  escaped  ;  so 
may  he,  if  out  of  the  church.  The  Lord  admonishes,  and  says,  *  he  that  is 
not  tvith  me  is  against  me.''^ — (Mark,  xii,  30.)  Who  violates  the  peace  of 
Christ  and  concord,  is  against  him." 

"  The  Lord  says,  *  /  and  the  Father  are  one,''  (John,  x,  30.) — And  again,  of 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  it  is  written,  *  and  these  three  are  one,^ 
(,Tohn,  i,  7.)  He  who  holds  not  this  unity,  holds  not  the  law  of  God,  noi 
the  faith  of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  nor  the  truth  that  is  unto  salvation." — 
Ibid.  p.  109. 

And  after  proving  that  by  the  seamless  garment  of  Christ  the 
unity  of  the  church  was  represented,  the  holy  Martyr  adds — 

"  Who  is  so  wicked  and  perfidious,  who  so  transported  by  the  rage  of 
discord,  as  to  think,  that  the  unity  of  God,  the  vesture  of  the  Lord,  the  church 
of  Christ  may  be  severed  ?  Christ  tells  us  in  his  gospel,  *  there  shall  be  one 
Hock,  and  one  shepherd.* — (John,  x,  16.)  Does  any  one  then  imagine,  that 
in  the  same  place  may  be  many  shepherds  and  many  flocks  ? 

"  The  Apostle  also,  urging  the  same  unity,  entreats  and  admonishes,  say- 
ing— *  Jfow  I  beseech  you  brethren,  by  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Chnst,  that 
you  all  speak  the  same  thing,  and  that  there  be  no  schism  among  yoiC — Ibid, 
p.  110. 

"  God  is  one,  and  Christ  is  one,  and  his  Church  is  one,  and  faith  is  one,  and 
his  people  connected  by  one  solid  bond,  is  one.  Unity  cannot  be  severed  nor 
the  one  body  by  laceration  be  divided.  Whatever  is  separated  from  the  stock 
cannot  live;  cannot  breathe  apart;  it  loses  the  substance  of  fife." — Ibid.  119. 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  who  was  a  catechist  of  the  church 
of  Alexandria,  as  St.  Clement  had  been,  and  succeeded  to  that 
see  about  the  year  247,  and  is  much  spoken  of  by  the  early 
ecclesiastical  writers,  as  highly  illustrious  for  the  learning  and 
zeal  with  which  he  defended  the  Catholic  cause,  and  who  died 
about  the  year  264,  thus  addresses  the  schismatic  Novatian  : 

"  You  ought  rather  to  have  suffered  all  things  than  to  have  raised  a  schism 
in  the  church.  To  die  in  defence  of  its  unity  would  be  as  glorious  as  laying 
down  our  life  rather  than  sacrifice  to  idols  ;  and  in  my  opinion  more  glorious  ; 
because  here  the  safety  of  the  whole  church  is  consulted.  If  you  bring  your 
brethren  to  union,  this  will  overbalance  your  fault,  which  will  be  forgotten 
and  you  will  receive  commendation.  If  you  cannot  gain  others,  at  least  save 
your  own  souls." — Apud.  Eusebii  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  vi,  c.  45,  318,  Edit.  Can' 
tab.  1720. 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES  265 

Laetantius,  who  was  called  the  Christian  Cicero,  in  the  4th 
Book  of  his  Institutions,  c.  xxx,  p.  232,  Cambridge  Edition, 
1685,  has  the  following  nervous  language  on  the  subject  • 

"  The  Catholic  church  alone  retains  the  true  worship.  This  is  the  source 
of  truth,  this  is  the  dwelhng  of  faith,  this  is  the  temple  of  God,  into  which 
he  that  enters  not,  and  from  which  he  that  goes  out,  forfeits  the  hope  of  life, 
and  of  eternal  salvation." 

Alexander,  patriarch  of  Alexandria,  who  vigorously  opposed 
the  heresy  of  Arius  from  its  very  birth,  and  excommunicated 
its  author  and  abettors,  and  who  assisted  at  the  first  council  of 
Nice,  anno  325,  writes  to  his  "  fellow-ministers  of  the  Catholic 
church,"  as  follows  : 

"  As  the  body  of  the  Catholic  churcn  is  one,  and  the  scriptures  command, 
that  we  maintain  the  bond  of  peace  and  concord,  it  is  proper,  that  in  regard 
to  all  things  that  are  done  amon^  us,  we  should  condole  or  rejoice  with  one 
another." — Apud  Socratem.  lib.  i,  c.  6,  p.  10.    Edit.  Cantab.  1720. 

And  speaking  of  the  Arians,  he  says  : 

"  That  seamless  garment  which  the  murderers  of  Christ  would  not  divide, 
these  men  (the  Arians)  have  dared  to  rip  asunder." — Apud  Theodoret,  Lib. 
i,  c.  4,  p.  9.     Edit.  Cantab.  1720. 

The  council  of  Nice,  the  first  general  council,  held  in  the 
year  325,  three  hundred  and  eighteen  bishops  present — (as  is 
generally  admitted) — and  held  at  a  period  too,  when,  by  the 
confession  of  all  Protestants,  the  church  exhibited  undoubted 
proofs  of  primitive  purity,  thus  declared, 

"But  as  to  those  persons  who  are  found  not  to  have  declined  to  any  schism, 
and  to  have  kept  themselves  uncontaminated  within  the  Catholic  and  Apos- 
tolic church,  they  have  a  right  to  ordain." — Gen.  Con.  t.  ii,  p.  250.  Ed.  Paris, 
1671. 

I  have  also  Eusehius,  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  v,  c.  11,  p.  212. 
Edit.  Cant.  1720.  St.  Athanasius,  whom  the.Protestants  have 
borrowed  from  us,  and  adopted  as  their  patron  saint,  and  whose 
truth  they  so  peremptorily  insist  upon,  (I  know  not  whether  he 
be  a  favourite  with  the  lay  church  of  Mr.  Pope,)  thus  expresses 
himself,  in  his  epistle  De  Decret.  Nicaen.  t.  i,  p.  211  : 

"  The  Gentiles  who  disagree  among  themselves,  are  deprived  of  the  true 
doctrine  ;  but  the  saints,  and  they,  who  are  the  preachers  of  truth,  arc  nna,ii- 
inous. — They  lived,  indeed,  at  different  times,  but  the  object  of  all  was  the 
same ;  for  they  were  the  prophets  of  one  God,  and  they  announced,  with  one 
consent,  the  same  word  of  truth." 

St.  Basil,— 

"  We  indeed,  ourselves,  are  of  little  value  ;  but,  by  the  grace  of  God,  we 
reniain  ever  the  same,  unaffected  by  the  common  change  of  things.  Our 
Delief  is  not  one  at  Seleucia,  and  another  at  Constantinople  ;  one  at  Lampas- 
chus,  and  another  at  Rome  :  and  so  different  from  what  was  in  former  timea, 
Dut  always  one  and  the  same." — Ep,  250  ad  Evczcinos,  t.  iii,  p.  386.  EdiU 
Bened .  Parisiis,  1 72 1 . 

23 


266  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

"As  many  as  hope  in  Christ,  are  one  people,  and  they,  who  are  of  Chn«l 
form  one  church,  though  it  may  be  named  in  many  places." — Ep.  161,  oJ 
•Smphil.  t.  iii,  p.  252.     " 

Again — Ep.  204,  ad  JVeocces.  t.  iii,  p.  307. 

"  It  is  morejust  to  judge  of  our  concerns,  not  from  this  or  that  man,  who 
walk  not  in  truth,  but  from  the  number  of  bishops  who,  in  all  regions,  are 
united  to  us.  Let  the  cities  of  Asia,  the  sound  part  of  Egypt,  and  of  Syria, 
be  interrogated.  These  by  letter  communicate  with  us,  and  we  with  them. 
From  these  you  may  learn,  that  we  are  all  unanimous  ;  all  think  the  same 
thing.  Wherefore,  he  who  dechnes  our  communion,  may  be  considered  by 
you,  as  separated  from  the  universal  church.  It  is  better  we  should  lose  ouf 
lives,  and  that  the  churches  should  remain  unanimous,  than  ihit  on  account 
of  our  childish  feuds,  the  faithful  should  be  so  much  injured, 

St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem. 

**UphoId  the  faith,  and  that  faith  alone,  which  is  now  delivered  to  thee  by 
the  church,  confirmed  as  it  is  by  all  the  scriptures." — Cat.  v,  INo.  7,  p.  75. 

"  We  declare  the  ways  of  error,  that  we  may  proceed  on  one  royal  road."— 
Cat.  xvi.  No.  6,  p.  226. 

"  As  far  as  our  time  of  instruction  would  allow,  we  have  spoken  to  you  of 
that  holv  and  Apostolic  faith  which  was  delivered  to  you." — Cat.*xviii.  Na 
7,  p.  274. 

Ephrem  of  Edessa, 

"  Blessed  is  the  man,  who  has  chosen  the  Catholic  rhurch.  They  shall  be 
deemed  deserving  of  punishment,  who  think  of  sowing  the  seeds  of  separa- 
tion in  the  breast  of  men.  Gluit  not  then  the  Catholic  faith,  nor  fall  from  it, 
»nouId  any  question  or  schism  arise." — In  Testam.  t.  iii,  p.  296.     Edit.  Bossil. 

Again — Sermo  24,  adv,  Herer,  p.  493,  J.  W.  Bit.  Quirini. 

"  The  assembly  of  the  good  detest  those  appellations,  which  are  derived 
from  men  ;  M'herefore,  the  Sabellians  and  Arians,  and  sectaries,  displeased 
with  the  names  which  their  respective  authors  have  given  them,  craftily  endea- 
vour to  decorate  themselves  with  the  name  of  our  church,  and  to  please  her. 
They  are  aware,  who  they  are,  whom  she  loves,  and  that  she  rests  wholly  on 
Christ  Have  they  not  read  how  the  Apostle  blamed  those,  who  said  they 
were  the  followers  of  Paul,  or  of  Apollos,  or  of  Cephas  ?  But  a  more  bitter 
course  of  grief  has  assailed  us,  since  some  of  our  own  standing  have  given 
tiieir  names  to  their  followers.  Blessed  be  that  name  wherein  we  were  called. 
Consider,  therefore,  on  which  side  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Apostles.  They 
gave  no  names  ;  and  where  it  is  done,  there  is  a  departure  from  their  rule. 
On  the  other  hand  we  declare,  that  truth  will  be  found  with  those,  who  are 
known  by  the  name  of  Christ  alone." 

St.  Ambrose,  the  meridian  sun  of  the  Latin  church,  comment- 
ing on  the  words  of  the  apostles  to  the  Ephesians,  chap,  iv,  v.  4. 
•*  One  body  and  one  spirit,  as  you  are  called  in  one  hope  of 
your  calling,"  says, 

"  To  promote  peace  and  concord,  Paul  added  this — that  as  the  church  is 
one  body,  so  the  people  should  cultivate  union ;  for  the  object  of  our  belief  is 
one,  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all." 

Again,  he  commands  unity,  that, 

"  As  all  are  called  to  unity,  we  should  differ  in  nothing.  For  if  there  be 
one  Lord,  that  is,  one  Christ ;  one  faith  and  one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father 
of  all,  the  mind  also  should  be  one,  and  the  heart  of  the  people  one,  since  ail 
the  things  that  he  enumerates  are  examples  of  unity  \  for  they  agree  in  all 
things."— Comment  in  Cap.  iv.  Ep.  ad  Ephes.  t.  iii,  p  '^OS.     Ed.  Parii,  1614* 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  267 

On  the  death  of  his  brother  Satyrus,  having  related  his  escape 
from  a  storm,  and  the  desire  he  felt  to  return  solemn  thanks  to 
God,  St.  Ambrose  adds  : 

"  When  we  got  to  land,  he  sent  for  the  bishop  of  the  place  ;  but  aware  that 
true  faith  alone  was  acceptable  to  heaven,  he  inquired  of  him  was  he  in 
communion  with  the  Catholic  bishops,  tffat  is  with  the  Roman  Bishops  (utrum- 
nam  cum  Episcopis  Catholicis,  hoc  est,  cum  Romana Ecclesia,  Convenient?) 
For  the  country  he  knew  was  infected  with  schism.  The  bishop  at  the  time 
had  withdrawn  himself  from  our  communion :  and  though  he  was  in  banish- 
ment for  his  faith,  yet  in  schism  there  could  be  no  true  faith.  He  had  faith 
towards  God,  but  not  towards  the  church,  whose  members  he  permitted  to  be 
torn  asunder.  For  since  Christ  died  for  the  church,  and  the  church  is  the 
body  of  Christ,  they,  by  whom  his  passion  is  made  void,  and  his  body  is  torn 
asunder,  cannot  hold  his  faith.  How  desirous  soever  therefore  my  brother 
might  be  to  express  publicly  his  gratitude,  he  chose  to  defer  it ;  because  he 
knew  that  true  faith  was  necessary  for  its  due  accomplishment." — De  Obitu 
Fratris  Satyri,  t.  iv,  p.  316. 

I  have  mentioned  this  one  fact,  because  it  shows  more  than 
any  reasoning  on  the  subject  of  union  could  do,  how  great  was 
the  horror  then  entertained  of  schism,  or  of  departing  from  the 
faith  or  discipline  of  the  church. 

I  have  also  Optatus,  Jerome,  Chrysostom,  Augustin,  Theo- 
doret,  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  &c,  here,  and  they  are  all 
unanimous  in  their  interpretation  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  on 
this  subject,  and  they  are  equally  strong  in  holding  the  absolute 
necessity  of  unity  in  the  church. 

Mr.  Pope. — Gentlemen,  having  spoken  on  the  moral  influ- 
ence of  that  gospel,  which  proclaims  acceptance  to  the  guilty 
by  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  I  shall  not  again  return  to  the 
subject.  I  have  been  referred  to  the  5th  chap,  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, in  evidence  that  the  word  isQevg  is  applied  to  the  minis- 
ters of  the  New  Testament.  I  reply,  that  the  passage  speaks 
of  heaven,  where  the  four-and-twenty  elders  are  represented  as 
singing  to  the  praise  of  the  Lamb  :  but  it  still  remains  for  my 
friend  to  prove  that  the  word  legevg  is  applied  to  the  ministers  of 
Christ  on  earth,  so  distinguish  them  from  the  laity.  I  turn  to  the 
first  chap,  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  the  6th  verse,  and  I  read, 
"  Who  hath  made  us  a  kingdom,  and  priests  to  God  and  his  Father." 
Here  we  find  the  Apostle,  in  reference  to  heaven,  including 
laics,  as  well  as  ecclesiastics,  in  the  general  appellation  of  kings 
and  priests.  In  the  1st  of  Peter,  2d  ch.  and  5th  ver.  believers 
on  earth,  generally,  are  called  "  ^aoiXeioy  LSQaTsv^a  ,"  "  a  royal 
priesthood  ;"  it  being  evident  from  the  opening  verse  of  the  epis- 
tle, that  it  is  addressed  not  to  ministers  alone,  or  to  the  learned 
exclusively,  but  generally  to  the  strangers  scattered  through  the 
countries,  of  which  the  Apostle  speaks.  The  expression  isgetg 
13,  therefore,  bestowed  on  the  people  of  God  at  large,  and  is  not 


26S  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

P.  peculiar  designatioa  of  the  ministers  of  the  New  Testament. 
My  friend  says,  that  Peter  calls  himself  a  priest.  I  turn  to  the 
passage  referred  to,  1st  of  Peter,  5th  chapter,  and  1st  verse,  and 
I  find  the  expression  'is  "  avfunQsa^viFgog,^^  "  fellow-elder,"  not 
legevg.  In  the  Douay  version,  I  find  that  there  also  Peter  in 
the  passage  is  called,  "  an  ancient,"  not  a  priest : 

"The  ancients,  therefore,  that  are  among  you,  I  beseech,  who  am  myself 
also  an  ancient,  and  a  witness  of  the  sufferings  of  Chilst." 

The  term  legevg  is  not  even  applied  specially  to  the  Apostles 
themselves.  Mr.  Maguire  referred  us  to  John  :  let  him  have  the 
kindness  to  mention  the  passage  to  which  he  calls  our  attention, 
and  you  will  be  convinced  that  te^evg  is  not  the  term  employed. 

[Mr.  Maguire. — I  spoke  of  Revelations  5th  chapter,  and 
ICth  verse.] 

Mr.  Pope. — I  was  under  the  impression  that  you  also  referred 
to  some  other  passage.  But,  to  bring  the  point  to  an  issue  :  I 
maintain,  that  the  word  leQsvg  is  not  applied  exclusively  to  the 
ministers  of  the  New  Testament,  or  even  to  the  Apostles  them 
selves.  I  here  assert,  that  it  is  not  so  applied.  Christ  spoke 
in  Syriac  ;  and  there  being  no  word  in  the  language  signifying 
"  to  represent,"  he  was  obliged  to  employ  the  auxihary  verb. 
But  the  Apostle  Paul  wrote  in  Greek,  which  furnishes  a  word 
meaning  "  to  represent ;"  yet  he  says,  in  1st  Cor.  10th  chapter, 

"  That  rock  was  Christ."  '  rj  irerpa  rjv  o  Ifipiarog, 

Again,  he  says,  Galatians,  4th  chap,  and  24th  verse, 

"  The  one  from  Mount  Sinai  engendering  into  bondage,  wliich  is  Agar." 
"oo-TiS  eariv  A.yap.^^ 

Here  the  auxiliary  verb  is  employed  as  denoting  to  represent. 

In  the  quotations  made  by  Mr.  Maguire  throughout  the 
discussion,  he  has  taken  it  for  granted,  that  the  church  of  Rome 
is  the  church  of  Christ ;  but  I  appeal  to  your  judgments,  whether 
he  has  been  able  to  prove  the  assumption.  I  admit  that  unity 
should  exist  amongst  the  disciples  of  Christ  ;  but  it  should  not 
bo  a  mere  external  and  superficial  unity  :  it  should  be  a  union 
of  affection  and  of  doctrine  in  every  essential  point.  This  unity 
1  have  shown  to  exist  in  the  Protestant  churches.  Let  the  creeds 
of  the  English,  Scotch,  Helvetic,  and  other  Protestant  com- 
munions, be  examined.  As  to  the  passage,  "  one  fold  and  one 
shepherd  ;"  I  hold,  that  the  Saviour  spoke  of  Jew  and  Gentile 
being  joined  together  in  one  church.     St.  Paul  says^ 

"  He  has  broken  down  the  middle  wall  of  partition,  and  hath  made  of  twain 
one  new  man." — Ephes.  ii,  14,  15. 

When  the  Saviour  prays  that  they  all  might  be  one,  he  speaka 
I  admit,  of  his  church  :  but  does  Mr.   M^gnre  mean  to  say 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  269 

that  the  Pope  is  the  shepherd.  I  have  shown  that  the  Pope  ia 
incompetent  to  disciarge  the  duties  of  the  office.  Christ  is  thai 
shepherd;  as  the  Apostle  Peter  says,  who  calls  him 

"The  shepherd  and  bishop  of  the  soul." — 1  Pet.  ii,  25. 
llr.  Maguire  refers  us  to  the  words  of  the  Saviour's  prayer  foi 
his  disciples, 

"  That  they  may  be  Dne,  as  thou  Father  art  in  me,  and  1  in  thee." 
Now  I  would  ask,  is  the  union  existing  between  the  Father 
and  the  Son  a  sensible,  a  tangible,  a  visible  union  1  Is  it  not 
evidently  spiritual  in  its  character  1  A  spiritual  bond  does 
subsist  amongst  the  people  of  God  in  the  Protestant  commu- 
nions. The  supplication  of  our  Lord  and  of  Paul,  that  they  ma^ 
be  of  "  the  same  mind,"  will  be  more  and  more  fulfilled  in  the 
real  and  spiritual  union  of  the  people  of  God.  I  trust,  we  shall 
see  them  in  heart  and  hand  still  more  cordially  united  together, 
evidencing  that  there  does  exist  amongst  them  a  kindred  spirit- 
ual affection,  *'  where  there  is  neither  Jew,  nor  Greek,  Barba- 
rian, Scythian,  bond  nor  free,  but  Christ  is  all  in  all." — Coloss. 
lii,  11.  These  holy  bonds  will  never  be  dissolved  :  they  survive 
the  stroke  of  death — they  exist  throughout  eternity  ;  and  as  the 
ages  of  immortality  shall  roll  along,  will  they  be  more  and  more 
consolidated,  and  more  closely  linked  together.  Myfriend  quotes 
Romans,  xvi,  17. 

"  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  to  mark  them  who  make  dissensions  and 
offences,  contrary  to  the  doctrine  which  you  have  learned,  and  to  avoid  them." 

Mark,  it  is  doctrine  of  which  he  speaks — now  it  is  in  exact 
compliance  with  this  command,  that  we  separate  from  the  church 
of  Rome  ;  because  she  errs  in  doctrine,  and  teaches  the  inven- 
tions of  men,  instead  of  the  commandments  of  God.  Perhaps 
Mr.  Maguire  would  like  to  hear  a  quotation  from  Augustin,  in 
illustration  of  this  observation.  Many  gave  up  the  scriptures 
in  the  time  of  persecution,  and  were  in  consequence  called 
Traditors.  It  was  urged  on  St.  Augustin  to  leave  the  commu- 
nion of  the  Traditors.     St,  Augustin  then  replies, 

"  Is  it  that  the  Traditors  have  instituted  some  new  sacraments,  or  some 
new  baptism  ?  Is  it  that  they  have  composed  books  to  teach  others  to  do  or 
imitate  the  action  of  the  Traditors,  or  that  they  have  recommended  those  books 
to  posterity,  or  that  we  hold  and  follow  that  doctrine  ?  If  they  had  done  so, 
and  suffered  no  person  to  have  been  in  their  communion,  but  those  who  would 
read  their  books  and  approve  that  doctrine,  I  say,  that  they  would  have  sepa- 
rated themselves  from  the  unity  of  the  church:  and  if  you  saw  me  in  their 
schism,  you  would  then  have  reason  to  say,  that  I  were  in  the  church  of  thd 
Traditors." — Augustin  Contr.  Ciescon.  lib.  iii,  cap.  38. 

Now  the  Church  of  Rome  has  introduced  new  sacraments 
and  uncanonical  books,  which  she  has  recommended  to  posterity 
us  divine.     She  suffers  none  in  her  communion  who  do  not  hold 

23* 


270  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

her  peculiar  opi lions,  and  therefore  separates  herself  from  the 
unity  of  the  ehur<;h  :  and  consequently,  according  to  St.  Augustin, 
they  who  are  in  the  church  of  Rome,  are  in  the  church  of  the 
schismatics. 

Mr.  Maguire  has  asked,  as  it  respects  unity,  what  difference 
is  there  between  discipline  and  doctrine  ?  Mr.  Maguire  himself 
told  us,  that  while  in  essential  matters  the  members  of  the  church 
of  Rome  agreed,  they  do  not  accord  in  matters  of  discipline — 
and  that  men  are  at  liberty  to  exercise  their  judgments  upon  the 
notes  attached  to  the  Douay  Bible. 

As  to  the  passage  relative  to  keeping  the  unity  of  the  spirit, 
you  plainly  perceive  that  it  speaks  of  a  spiritual  unity. 

"  Careful  to  keep  the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace,  one  body  and 
one  spirit,  as  you  are  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling,  one  Lord,  one  faith, 
one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above  all,  and  through  all, 
and  in  us  all." — Eph.  iv,  3,  6. 

The  passage  clearly  refers,  not  to  unity  founded  on  non- 
essential points,  but  to  unity  founded  on  the  great  leading  truths 
of  Christianity.  In  the  Protestant  authorized  confessions  of 
faith,  we  can  see  that  there  exists  an  accordance  on  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  revelation. 

Again,  Mr.  Maguire  quoted  from  Philippians, 
"  Let  us  also  continue  in  the  same  rule." 

But  I  beg  your  attention  to  the  preceding  verse, — 

"If  in  any  thing  you  be  otherwise  minded,  this  also  God  will  reveal  to  you.** 
— iii,  16. 

This  passage  shows,  that  at  that  time  some  differences  of 
opinion  probably  existed  amongst  them,  and  that  the  Apostles 
did  not  excommunicate  them  for  entertaining  those  differences  ; 
but  assured  them  at  the  same  time  that  God  would  reveal  to 
them  the  truth  on  the  particular  points  concerning  which  differ- 
ences existed.     Mr.  Maguire  has  also  quoted, 

"  If  any  be  contentious  we  have  no  such  custom." — 1  Cor.  xi,  16. 

Mr.  Maguire  and  J.  K.  L.  appear  to  have  fallen  into  a  similar 
misapprehension  of  the  meaning  of  this  passage. — "  No  such 
custom,"  refers  not  to  contentions,  but  to  women  sitting  with 
the  head  uncovered  in  the  assemblies  of  the  saints.  I  find  that 
certain  differences  existed  and  were  allowed,  even  in  the  church 
at  Rome.  We  read  that  one  man  believed  that  he  might  eat  all 
things,  another  that  he  should  eat  herbs. — (Rom.  xiv,  2.) — that 
one  man  esteemed  one  day  above  another,  while  another  esteemed 
everiy  day  alike. — (5th  v.)     But  what  says  the  Apostle? 

*'  Let  every  man  be  fully  persuaded  in  his  own  mind." — (5th  v.) 

Or  as  the  Douay  version  has  it — 

"  Let  every  man  abound  in  his  own  sense." 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.         271 

Mr.  Maguire  has  informed  us,  that  the  primitive  Aurch  cast 
out  heretics.  Every  Protestant  church,  also,  has  a  right  to 
exclude  from  its  communion,  if  it  pleases.  I  admit  that  the 
Fathers  spoke  of  one  church ;  but  that  one  church  was  the  mys- 
tical body  of  Christ,  not  confined  to  one  external  communion, 
portions  of  it  belonging  to  the  various  Christian  congregations. 
My  friend  has  referred  us  to  the  passago  of  Cyprian,  "  he  has 
not  God  for  his  Father,  who  has  not  the  church  for  his  mother," 
and  has  twice  quoted  it.  Now  I  say,  that  Cyprian,  in  a  letter 
m  which  he  reprehends  Pope  Stephen,  once  employed  that  pas- 
sage in  reference  to  Stephen  himself,  because  he  introduced 
divisions  into  the  church. 

Mr.  Maguire  observes,  that  the  church  was  not  confined  to 
ihe  diocess  of  Rome  ;  that  the  Cathohc  church  in  primitive  times 
was  not  the  church  of  Rome — this  is  precisely  the  same  language 
which  he  employed  before.  St.  Firmilian,  addressing  Pope 
Stephen  says  : 

"  Do  not  deceive  yourself;  you  have  cut  yourself  off  from  the  church  ;  foi 
he  is  truly  a  schismatic  who  has  made  himself  an  apostate  from  the  commu- 
nion of  ecclesiastical  unity  :  for  while  you  think  you  can  excommunicate  all 
Dther  churches  from  you,  you  have  only  excommunicated  yourself  from  them." 
Cyp.  Ep.  75,  p.  228,— Edit.  Oxon. 

St.  Gregory  the  Great  remarks  : 

"  If  the  church  come  to  depend  upon  one,  it  must  certainly  fall.** 

And  St.  Cyprian  says  : 

"  That  therefore  Christ  made  the  college  of  bishops  numerous,  that  if  one 
should  fall  or  turn  heretical,  the  rest  might  interfere  for  the  saving  of  the 
flock," 

For  he  says  : 

"  There  is  but  one  flock,  and  one  episcopate,  of  which  every  bishop  has 
the  whole  in  partnership  with  the  rest." 

"  Episcopatus  unus  est,  cujus  a  singulis  in  solidum  pars  tenetur." 

The  historian  Socrates,  who  carried  on  Eusebius's  Ecclesias- 
tical History  from  the  year  329,  to  the  year  440,  informs  us, 
that  a  great  diversity  existed  among  the  different  churches  in 
respect  to  ceremonies  and  discipline,  especially  with  "espcct  to  the 
marriage  of  persons  in  holy  orders.  He  remarks,  that  the  Apostle 
did  not  give  any  directions  about  holy  days,  their  only  design 
being  to  teach  faith  and  virtue.  He  also  says,  that  ther*^  were 
scarcely  two  churches  which  exactly  agreed  on  the  subject  of 
prayers  ;  and  concludes  by  observing,  that  to  give  a  catalogue 
of  all  the  rites  and  customs  in  use  among  Christians  in  all  cities 
and  countries,  would  be  very  difficult,  if  not  impossible. — (L. 
V,  c.  22.)  St.  Irenseus  notices,  in  terms  rather  of  commenda- 
tion than  censure,  the  diversity  of  fasts  among  his  contemporary 
brethren. — Ap.  Euseb,  1,  v,  c.  22.  Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna, 


272  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

and  Anicetus,  Bishop  of  Rome,  held  irreconcilably  opposite 
opinions  respecting  the  time  of  celebrating  Easter  ;  yet  they 
did  not  violate  Christian  unity,  as  their  less  worthy  successors 
have  done  on  the  same  custom — the  latter,  as  Eusebius  states 
having  permitted  the  former  to  administer  the  eucharist  in  his 
church.  With  regard  to  the  re -baptizing  those  who  had  been 
baptized  by  heretics,  the  church  of  Africa,  adopting  the  imme- 
morial usage  of  the  ancient  churches  of  Cappadocia,  Cilicia, 
and  Galatia,  differed  from  that  of  Rome  ;  yet  this  difTe fence 
occasioned  no  schism  between  them.  St.  Cyprian,  some  will 
be  surprised  to  learn,  held  washing  the  feet  to  be  a  sacrament  : 
and  St.  Augustin  differed  from  St.  Jerome,  respecting  the  intro- 
duction of  Jewish  rites  and  usages  into  the  Christian  church  ; 
but  they  did  not  depart  from  Christian  charity.  From  the  writings 
of  St.  Irenaeus,  St.  Firmilian,  and  Justin  Martyr,  we  learn,  that 
they  who  required  conformity  in  matters,  not  evidently  funda- 
mental on  scriptural  grounds,  were  regarded  as  violators  of 
Christian  unity. — (Iren.  Ap.  Euseb.  1.  v,  c.  24.  Firm.  Ap. 
Cyp.  ep.  75,  J.  Mart.  Dial,  cum  Tryph.) 

Hear  the  sentiment  laid  down  in  the  Maynooth  class  book, 
p.  17: 

*'  Schismatics,  even  those  who  should  not  err  in  doctrine,  by  the  act  of 
Bchism  alone  are  excluded  from  the  church,  and  are  without  the  way  o 
salvation." 

Or  in  other  words,  those,  however  correct  their  doctrines,  who 
separate  from  the  church  of  Rome,  are  excluded  from  the  church 
of  Christ,  and  are  without  the  way  of  salvation !'  I  assert  that 
the  unity  subsisting  in  the  church  of  Rome  is  a  unity  without 
examination.  Since  the  commencement  of  the  discussion,  I 
received  a  letter  from  London,  as  did  Mr.  Maguire  also  (t^or  the 
letter  to  me  states  that  a  duplicate  was  sent  to  Mr.  Maguire.) 
It  is  signed  "  An  Inquirer  after  Truth."  The  writer  remarks, 
that  before  the  discussions  took  place  in  Ireland,  his  mind  was 
not  troubled  with  doubts — but  that  since  these  were  held,  he  has 
been  reading  the  scriptures  under  the  direction  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  and  finds  many  difficulties 
raised  in  his  mind  in  reference  to  the  sacred  volume.  The  unity 
of  the  church  of  Rome  is,  in  truth,  a  unity  that  will  not  bear 
the  test  of  examination. 

We  have  heard  of  the  faith  of  the  collier  commended  by 
Cardinal  Bellarmine.  The  collier,  when  asked  what  it  was  he 
believed,  answered  :  "  I  believe  what  the  church  believes." 
The  other  rejoined — "  What  then  does  the  church  believe  ?" 
He  replied  readily — "  The  church  believes  what  I  believe." 
The  other  anxious  to  bring  him  to  the  point,  once  more  resumed 
his  inquiry :     "  Tell  me  then,  I  pray  you,  what  it  is  which  you 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES.  27J 

and  the  church  believe  V^     The  only  answer  the  collier  could 
give,  was — "  Why,  truly,  Sir,  the  church  and  I,  both  believe  the 
same  thing." — See  Bellarmine  de  arte  bene  moriendi,  lib.  ii,  ch.  9. 
Hear  a  schoolman.     Gabriel  Byel  maintains  that, 

*'  If  he  who  implicitly  believes  the  church,  should  think,  misled  by  natural 
reason,  that  the  Father  is  greater  than  the  Son,  and  existed  before  him,  or  that 
the  three  Persons  are  things  locally  distant  from  one  another,  or  the  like,  he 
is  not  a  heretic,  nor  sins,  provided  he  do  not  defend  this  error  pertinaciously, 
for  he  believes  what  he  does  believe,  because  he  thinks  that  the  church  believes 
sa  subjecting  his  opinion  to  the  faith  of  the  church.  For  though  his  opinion 
b„-  3rioneous,  his  opinion  is  not  his  faith,  nay  his  faith  in  contradiction  to  his 
opmions,  is  the  faith  of  the  church.  What  is  still  more,  this  implicit  faith  not 
only  defends  from  heresy  and  sin,  but  even  constitutes  merit  in  heterodoxy 
itself,  and  preserves  in  that  merit  one  who  forms  a  most  heterodox  opinion, 
because  he  thinks  the  church  believes  so." — Dr.  CampbeWs  Lectures  on  EccL 
His.  vol.  ii,  p.  259. 

Mr.  Maguire. — With  respect  to  the  5th  chapter  of  St.  John, 
I  do  assert,  and  I  beg  the  public  to  bear  it  in  mind,  that  the 
expression  legevg  is  applied  to  the  twenty- four  who  sat  around 
the  throne,  and  were  called  neither  more  nor  less  than  Presby- 
ters. I  am  satisfied  to  let  the  passage  be  examined  by  any 
learned  man  ;  I  here  offer  to  submit  the  question  to  the  adjudi- 
cation of  any  two  individuals. — Let  Mr.  Pope  select  on^  and  I 
shall  select  another,  and  then  let  them  examine  the  contcA  Mr, 
Pope  has  recurred  to  the  quibble  about  the  difference  bt  veen 
the  church  of  Rome  and  the  Catholic  church.  I  appeal  to  our- 
selves if  I  have  not  quoted  upwards  of  twenty  Fathers  in  refu- 
tation of  the  idle  argument  which  Mr.  Pope  endeavours  to 
construct  on  this  matter.  Have  I  not  amply  shown  that  the  term 
"  Catholic,"  was  applied  to  all  the  churches  in  Asia,  in  Africa, 
in  Spain,  in  Gaul,  &c,  &c,  holding  communion  with  the  See  of 
Rome  1  I  have  proved  that  the  holy  Fathers  all  agreed  in  this 
interpretation  of  the  words  "  Catholic  church."  It  is  a  mere 
play  upon  words  with  which  my  opponent  has  amused  you.  I 
have  laid  before  you  abundant  evidence  that  before  the  Reform- 
ation, there  existed  no  other  church  which  claimed  to  itself  the 
title  of  "  Catholic,"  but  the  church  of  Rome.  With  regard  to 
the  doctrine  which  Mr.  Pope  has  broached,  on  the  subject  of 
unity,  I  will  only  say,  that  all  sects  in  the  world  are  in  the  spirit 
of  inion,  according  to  Mr.  Pope.  But  our  Saviour  has  com- 
pared the  unity  of  his  church  to  the  union  subsisting  between 
him  and  his  heavenly  Father  ;  therefore,  that  union  must  be  of 
a  most  intimate  nature,  and  the  church  must  endeavour  to  imitate 
the  wonderful  union  existing  between  God  the  Father,  and  God 
'the  Son,  and  God  the  Holy  Ghost.  With  regard  to  the  differ- 
ences of  which  Mr.  Pope  spoke,  as  existing  in  the  Catholic 
church,  they  involve  not  principles,  and  that  is  a  sufficient  answei 


274  THE    WA^XT    OF    UNITY    OF 

to  his  very  silly  objection  relative  to  the  Dominicans,  the  Fran- 
ciscans, and  the  Jesuils.  Mr.  Pope  has  also  introduced  the 
Jansenists — they  were  long  since  condemned  b)  the  Catholic 
church  in  the  bull  Unigenitus.  As  to  St.  Ambrose,  1  have  already 
quoted  at  length  his  opinions  on  the  necessity  of  unity.  With 
respect  to  texts  of  scripture,  I  fearlessly  appeal  to  every  gentle- 
man who  hears  me,  whether  I  have  not  brought  forward  more 
texts  of  scripture  than  Mr.  Pope — whether  my  texts  have  not 
been  clearly  and  decisively  in  support  of  the  doctrine  which  I 
maintain — and  whether  Mr.  Pope  has  not  offered  violence  to  the 
meaning  of  scripture,  by  the  strange  and  far-fetched  interpreta- 
tions which  he  has  sought  to  impose  upon  this  learned  assembly  ? 
I  ask  any  candid  man  here,  whether  Mr.  Pope's  explanations  of 
some  texts  have  not  been  more  difficult  and  abstruse  than  the  texts 
themselves?  If  such  be  not  the  fact,  I  know  nothing  of  scrip- 
ture. What  right  has  Mr.  Pope  to  set  up  his  private  judgment 
in  preference  to  the  opinions  of  the  Apostles  who  were  inspired? 
He  quoted  the  royal  prophet  as  to  the  eastern  kings  who  had 
combined  against  God  ;  and  he  introduced  this  as  an  argument 
against  the  existence  of  unity  in  the  Catholic  church  !  Was 
there  a  church  established  then?  If  there  were,  he  must  then, 
to  sustnm  his  arguments,  prove  that  it  was  lawful  for  the  eastern 
king !  to  divide  themselves  from  that  church,  and  to  become 
sch    matics. 

i  there  were  not  a  church  government  then  existing,  his 
argument  falls  to  the  ground.  I  have  laid  before  you  this  day, 
plain  and  obvious  texts  of  scripture,  regarding  the  necessity  of 
unity  in  the  church  of  Christ.  The  doctrine  which  I  advocate, 
I  have  shown  to  be  distinctly  founded  upon  scripture.  I  have 
defied  Mr.  Pope  to  show,  that  in  regard  to  unity,  there  is  any 
distinctior^  made  between  essentials  and  non-essentials  in  scrip- 
ture. The  texts  which  have  been  quoted  equally  refer  to  matters 
of  discipline,  and  of  doctrine.  If  men  will  not  be  united- -if 
divisions,  no  matter  how  they  originate,  will  exist;  if  people 
become  split  into  sects  and  parties,  and  endeavour  to  tear  their 
common  parent  asunder,  surely  the  evil  is  not  to  be  laid  at  the 
door  of  the  Catholic  church.  She  is  not  to  be  held  accountable 
for  those  of  her  children  who  may  disobey  her — who  violate 
charity,  and  disturb  that  peace  which  our  Lord  bequeathed  to 
his  church — 

"  My  peace  I  leave  you — my  peace  I  give  you ;  not  as  the  world  giveth  do 
I  give  you." 

No  plea — no  pretext  can  ever  justify  a  departure  from  that 
Christian  harmony,  of  which  our  Saviour  set  an  example,  th** 
necessity  of  which  we  find  recommended  from  his  sacred  lips, 
and  which  he  bequeathed  to  his  church,  io  bo  observed  and 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  275 

nr«,aintained  without  condition  or  alteration,  unto  the  end  of  the 
world — 

"  My  feact  1  leave  you — iny  peace  I  give  you ;  not  as  the  world  giveth  do 
I  give  you." — John,  xiv,  27. 

Mr.  Pope  quotes  the  holy  Fathers  ;  it  is  rather  extraordinary, 
indeed,  that  the  Fathers  should  be  quoted  to  show  that  unity  in 
the  church  is  not  necessary.  They  affirm  that  there  is  no  having 
the  inheritance  of  Peter  without  the  faith  of  Peter.  So  I  believe. 
There  can  be  no  inheritance  possessed  without  faith  ;  and  there 
can  be  no  real  faith,  according  to  scripture,  where  there  is  not 
charity  and  Christian  union.  I  have  proved  that  the  unity  which 
is  commanded  by  our  Saviour,  which  was  preached  by  the 
Apostles,  and  which  was  taught  by  their  disciples  in  the  first 
ages  of  Christianity,  exists  alone  in  the  Catholic  church.  Mr 
Pope  says  that  the  unity  which  exists  among  Protestants  is  suf 
ficient.  I  call  upon  him  to  prove  his  position  upon  the  authority 
of  the  word  of  God.  He  has  quoted  the  church  of  Rome  with 
regard  to  councils,  &c,  to  show  that  she  had  not  unity.  But 
since  the  Reformation,  it  is  admitted  by  Protestants,  that  they 
have  no  such  unity.  The  illustrious  Grotius  lamented  the 
schisms  which  existed  among  Protestants  in  his  days ;  and  he 
said  it  would  be  almost  better  to  return  to  Popery  than  to  remain 
divided  as  they  were.  Luther  himself  threatened  to  return  to 
Popery  if  their  divisions  increased.  When  he  saw  Calvin 
denying  openly  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  eucharist,  he 
lamented  that  he  had  ever  quitted  Popery. 

With  regard  to  councils,  the  assertions  of  Mr.  Pope  are  mere 
assumptions,  and  it  is  a  well  known  rule  in  logic,  that  '  quod 
gratis  asseritur,  gratis  negari  debet.'  I  again  challenge  Mr. 
Pope  to  show  from  scripture  the  distinction  between  essentials 
and  non-essentials.  I  call  upon  him  to  prove  that  there  is  a 
distinction  drawn  in  scripture  between  doctrine  and  discipline. 
He  must  prove  that  there  is  a  difference  upon  an  article  of  faith 
or  that  there  exists  a  distinct  breach  of  communion  in  the  Cath- 
olic church,  in  order  to  establish  his  position,  that  she  does  not 
possess  unity.  Differences  as  to  private  opinions  amongst  pri- 
vate individuals  tie  may  prove,  but  these  individuals  did  not 
disturb  that  peace,  and  concord,  and  unity,  which  Christ  left  to 
his  church,  and  which  form  some  of  the  noblest  marks — the 
most  powerful  arguments  of  her  divine  origin. 

He  may  show  the  existence  of  differences,  not  relating  to 
matters  of  faith  or  discipline  in  the  church,  but  they  are  not  dif- 
ferences of  opinion  which  place  those  who  entertain  them  out 
of  the  church.  He  may  prove  the  existence  of  such  differences, 
but  a  breach  of  communion  hie  canijot  establish.  He  asks  for 
proofs  that  Peter  was  appointed  the  head  of  the  church.     I  think 


276  THE    WANl     OF    UMTY    OF 

1  have  furnished  ample  proofs  of  the  fact.  He  asserts  that  it  wi 
robbing  Christ  of  his  rights.  This  is  a  mere  play  upon  words. 
There  is  no  doubt  that  Christ  in  heaven  is  the  sole  and  invisible 
head  of  the  church — but  knowing  the  frailties  of  man,  our  Lord 
deemed  it  necessary,  in  order  to  preserve  the  principle  of  unity, 
to  appoint  a  visible  head  of  his  church  to  act  as  his  instrument 
and  agent  upon  earth.  Is  there  ought  in  this  derogatory  from 
the  majesty  of  God  1  Is  not  the  king  the  visible  head  of  the 
established  church  of  England  ?  His  majesty,  no  doubt,  will 
be  highly  pleased  with  Mr.  Pope  for  denying  his  spiritual  supe- 
riority. I  always  imagined  that  his  majesty  was  the  head  of  the 
Protestant  church  in  these  countries — the  centre  and  bond  of 
connection  to  keep  it  together.  He  is  to  preserve  the  homilies 
and  the  thirty-nine  articles,  and  not  to  allow  even  the  slightest 
deviation  to  be  made  from  them.  They  contain  certain  rules 
respecting  faith  and  discipline  in  the  Protestant  church,  and  the 
king  is  bound  by  oath  not  to  suffer  the  slightest  deviation  from 
them.  The  king  swears  to  support  the  establishment,  and  the 
test  act  excludes  all  from  situations  unless  they  take  oaths  which 
bind  as  to  certain  forms  and  rules  of  faith.  The  elements  of 
union  have  been  scattered  in  the  Protestant  churches,  and  they 
can  never  again  be  brought  into  combination.  I  should  be  glad 
to  know  from  Mr.  Pope,  what  did  our  Saviour  mean  when  he 
said  to  Peter : 

"  Simon  Barjona,  lovest  thou  me  more  than  these ;  he  saith  to  him,  dear 
Lord,  thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee.  He  saith  to  him,  Feed  my  Lambs," 
John,  xxi,  17. 

Our  Saviour  repeated  the  interrogatory ;  Peter  made  a  similar 
reply,  and  our  Saviour  again  said  ;  '*  Feed  my  Lambs."  But 
when  he  repeated  the  question  a  third  time,  Peter  became 
troubled,  and  exclaimed  ;  "  Lord  thou  knowest  all  things — 
Thou  knowest  that  I  love  thee."  Our  Saviour  then  said  to 
him  :   "  Feed  my  sheep." 

Now,  I  defy  the  ingenuity  of  my  friend  to  explain  away  these 
words.  This  address  was  not  made  to  the  other  Apostles,  but 
personally  and  individually  to  Peter.  There  is  nothing  in  the 
fold  of  Christ  but  sheep  and  lambs  (clergy  and  laity)  ;  ovei 
them  Peter  was  appointed  supreme  pastor,  and  invested  with  the 
authority  of  government.     Our  Lord  afterwards  says  to  Peter : 

"  I  will  give  to  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  whatsoever 
tliou  shalt  bind  upon  earth,  it  shall  be  bound  also  in  heaven,  and  whatsoever 
tliou  shalt  loose  upon  earth,  it  shall  be  loosed  also  in  heaven." 

Could  Mr.  Pope  quote  any  text  of  scripture  against  me  equally 
as  plain  and  obvious  as  the  foregoing  ?  Was  he  able  to  adduce 
any  direct  text  in  support  of  his  private  interpretation — while  on 
the  other  hand  I  proved  all  my  doctrines  by  manifest  texts  of 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  277 

scripture,  and  upon  the  words  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles.  Mr. 
Pope  endeavours  to  show  that  Peter  could  not  be  the  successor 
of  Christ,  as  this  evil  would  follow  that  the  successor  of  Peter 
would  be  a  greater  man  than  St.  John  the  evangelist,  who  lived 
after  the  death  of  Peter.  To  such  straights  has  my  opponent 
been  reduced.  He  cannot  deny  that  Peter  had  a  successor. 
Why  not  prove  that  some  difference  on  matters  of  faith  arose 
between  him  and  St.  John?  But  the  successors  of  Peter  were 
blessed  with  humility,  charity,  and  divine  faith — the  first  thirty- 
four  of  them  suffered  martydom.  If  they  had  happened  to  have 
a  difference,  they  would  have  recurred  to  St.  John  for  his  advice 
and  guidance — but  that  would  not  be  denying  their  right  to  suc- 
ceed Peter,  as  the  visible  head  of  the  church  on  earth. 

"If  I  then,"  said  our  Saviour,  "being  Lord  and  Master,  have  washed  your 
feet,  you  also  ought  to  wash  one  another's  feet." 

That  act,  I  affirm,  with  the  Catholic  church,  to  be  an  act  of 
humility,  not  a  precept — but  it  is,  to  all  appearance,  a  positive 
precept,  and  I  repeatedly  called  on  my  friend  to  show  by  what 
authority  he  neglected  to  observe  it.  He  drew  a  distinction 
indeed  between  hot  and  cold  climates,  and  the  greater  necessity 
which  exists  for  washing  the  feet  in  the  former  than  in  the  latter. 
But  no  such  distinction  is  drawn  in  the  text — the  commandment 
of  the  Saviour  is  not  to  be  regulated  by  hot  and  cold  countries. 
He  talks  of  the  council  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  Peter  having 
spoken  first — if  Peter  had  spoken  last  what  would  that  be  to  the 
argument?  St.  James  gave  a  good  advice,  which  was  inspired 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  because  it  was  adopted  by  Peter,  there- 
fore Peter  could  not  be  the  head  of  the  Church !  This  conclu- 
sion is  certainly  not  agreeable  to  the  premises — He  says  that 
no  Pope  claimed  the  title  of  ecumenical  pastor  until  the  year 
600 — why  there  was  no  such  word  as  ecumenical  in  existence 
till  that  period.  The  word  '  consubstantiality'  is  not  in  scrip- 
ture, and  does  not  occur  till  300  years  after  the  Apostles,  when 
we  find  it  in  the  Athanasian  creed,  and  the  decrees  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Nice.  If  Mr.  Pope's  argument  then  on  this  head  be  valid 
against  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope,  it  is  equally  valid  against 
the  Athanasian  creed,  and  he  should  deny  both.  I  admit  the 
fact  of  Stephen  throwing  the  body  of  the  Pope  into  the  Tyber, 
and  the  greater  scoundrel  he  was,  I  affirm,  for  so  doing.  I 
admit  there  were  some  bad  characters  among  the  Popes.  But 
I  have  already  drawn  a  distinction  between  infallibility  and  im- 
peccability. Besides,  I  never  said  that  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope  formed  a  portion  of  my  creed.  Christ  promised  his 
church  that  she  would  never  fail  in  the  faith,  but  that  promise 
never  implied,  that  her  children  should  be  incapable  of  sin.  As 
I  have  already  told  you.  ^he^e  were  eleven  monstrous  bad  Popea 

24 


278  THE    WANT    OF    UNITT    OF 

out  of  nearly  three  hundred  good  and  virtuous  characters  whicb 
adorned  the  chair  of  Peter.  Surely  that  is  a  vast  majority  to 
counterbalance  the  few  bad  names.  Honorius  was  not  a  heretic. 
It  was  not  for  heresy  that  he  was  deposed,  but  because  he  had 
been  put  into  the  chair  by  temporal  power.  He  was  suspected 
of  being  favourable  to  the  Monotholites  ;  but  I  deny  that  it  was 
ever  proved  that  he  was  a  Monotholite  himself.  I  venture  to 
affirm,  that  Mr.  Pope  will  be  called  to  an  account  for  having 
denied  the  king's  supremacy  ;  and  it  will  be  necessary,  perhaps, 
for  some  of  his  friends  to  intercede  for  him  with  his  majesty, 
lest,  like  Chancellor  Moore  and  Bishop  Fisher,  he  be,  without 
further  ceremony,  committed  to  the  tower.  In  that  case  he 
may,  for  once,  have  to  acknowledge  the  efficacy  of  the  inierces- 
sion  of  saints.  I  maintain,  that  isqevg  is  applied  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament to  the  Apostles.  But  whether  it  be,  or  not,  does  not 
much  matter  for  the  argument.  There  is  no  sacrificing  priest 
in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term,  but  Christ  himself,  who  is  at  once 
th(;  priest  and  victim,  who  is  offered  up  as  a  perpetual  sacrifice 
to  fulfill  the  prophecy  of  Malachy,  that  in  all  parts  of  the  world 
a  sacrifice  shall  be  offered  to  the  Lord. 

"  P'or  f.oni  tlie  rising  of  the  sun  to  the  going  down  of  the  same,  my  name 
is  great  among  the  Gentiles ;  and  in  every  place  a  sacrifice  is  made,  and  a 
clean  oblation  offered  to  my  name ;  because  my  name  is  great  among  the 
Gentiles,  saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts." 

If  there  had  been  only  a  single  sacrifice  offered  up  in  Jeru- 
salem, according  to  Mr.  Pope,  then  this  prophecy  of  Malachy 
would  not  have  been  fulfilled.  Mr.  Pope  has,  by  weak  and  idle 
arguments,  endeavoured  to  show  that  there  could  have  been  no 
successor  to  Christ.  If  Christ  left  a  sacrifice  and  appointed  a 
successor  in  his  church,  neither  blasphemy  nor  wickedness  can 
be  imputed  to  those  who  believe  the  fact. — Christ  promised  that 
his  church  would  never  fail,  and  that  he  would  remain  with  her 
in  spirit,  till  the  consummation  of  ages.  But  Mr.  Pope,  to  sus- 
tain his  argument,  must  prove  that  the  whole  church  was  for  the 
space  of  900  years  buried  in  darkness  and  error.  Let  those 
who  will,  believe  it — I  want  not  to  make  the  Pope  greater  than 
other  men.  He  is,  like  myself,  a  man,  liable  to  the  frailties  of  hu- 
nian  nature.    The  infallibility  of  the  Pope  is  no  doctrine  of  mine. 

Mr.  Pope  says,  that  he  does  not  differ  on  essentials  with  the 
church  of  England,  and  yet  he  denies  more  than  one  half  of  her 
articles  of  faith.  Either  he  holds  them  essential  or  he  does  not. 
In  the  latter  case  his  separation  is  unjustifiable,  and  he  evidently 
shows  that  he  misunderstands  the  maxims  of  the  gospel :  he  rends 
<he  seamless  garment  of  Christ  without  cause.  He  should  not 
for  trifling  reasons  disturb  that  harmony  which  Christ  ordained 
should  subsist  between  the  members  of  his  church — he  should 


THE 'PROTESTANT    CHURCHES.  279 

continue  to  hold  communion  with  the  bishops  of  the  estahhshed 
church,  and  not  set  up  a  conventicle  of  his  own.  He  should  not 
break  communion  ne  in  minima  pariicula.  The  holy  Fathers 
held  schism  and  disunion  to  be  mortal  sins.  Mr.  Pope  spoke 
of  a  letter  which  he  had  received  from  London,  and  which  he 
would  have  us  suppose  came  from  a  reformed  Catholic,  another 
Blanco  White.  But  latet  anguis  in  herha,  I  got  a  copy  of  the 
same  too.  I  suspect  that  it  came  from  the  opposite  party,  and 
was  intended  to  frighten  me  from  this  discussion.  It  was  proba- 
bly a  ruse  employed  to  make  me  retreat,  that  my  friend  then, 
instead  of  suffering  a  defeat,  might  raise  the  shout  of  victory. 

Mr.  Pope. — As  to  the  word  leqevg  in  the  5th  of  the  apoca- 
lypse, the  term  in  that  passage  is  clearly  bestowed  upon  pres- 
byters in  heaven.  My  friend  has  appealed  to  any  learned  men 
on  the  subject.  He  may  prefer  an  ecclesiastic  ;  I  therefore 
nominate  Mr.  Singer  ;  let  Mr.  Maguire  name  his  referee.  [JVlr. 
Clynch  ivas  then  named  by  JVfr.  JWaguire,']  Mr.  Maguire  has 
not  answered  my  quotation  from  the  Psalms,  on  the  ground  in 
which  I  made  it.  I  brought  it  forward  merely  as  evidence,  that 
unity,  abstractedly  considered,  is  not  a  proof  of  the  true  church. 
As  to  the  distinction  of  essentials  and  non-essentials,  I  have 
shown  that  it  was  recognized  by  St.  Paul,  in  the  differences 
which  existed  in  the  church  of  Rome  in  his  day,  and  which  he 
allowed  to  continue.  The  scriptures,  therefore,  does  make  this 
distinction.  The  sacred  volume,  Mr.  Maguire  asserts,  requires 
an  agreement  in  discipline  as  well  as  in  matters  of  faith  ;  and 
yet  he  before  informed  us  that  the  church  of  Rome  agrees,  not 
in  matters  of  discipline,  but  in  matters  of  faith,  and  has  therefore 
contradicted  himself.  I  have  already  entered  into  the  question 
of  the  apocryphal  books,  and  shall  not  now  reconsider  it.  Ac- 
cording to  Mr.  Maguire,  the  church  has  two  heads — Christ  and 
the  Pope  :  so  it  appears  that  Mr.  Maguire  thereby  makes  the 
church  of  Christ  a  monster.  He  refers  me  to  the  Saviour's 
address  to  Peter;  "Feed  my  sheep.'' — Augustine,  (De  Agone 
Christ,  c.  30)  and  Ambrose,  (De  Dign.  Sacred,  p.  336)  as  I 
have  already  shown,  declare  it  as  their  opinion,  that  Christ  gave 
this  privilege  not  to  Peter  only,  but  to  all  pastors.  As  Peter 
had  denied  the  Saviour,  our  Lord  saw  it  necessary  to  re-instate 
him  in  the  apostolic  office ;  thrice  did  he  address  him  in  doing 
so,  in  reference  to  his  threefold  denial.  Here  observe,  that 
Irenceus  informs  us,  that  Peter  was  not  the  only  founder  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  but  Paul  also  : 

"  Fundantes  igitur  et  instuentes  beati  apostoli  (Petrus  et  Paiilus,)  ecclesiam 
(Romanan)  Lino  episcopatum  administrandae  ecclesiee  tradiderunt.  Suc- 
cedit  auternei  Anacletus.  Post  eum  tertio  loco  ab  apostolis  episcopatura 
sortitur  Clemens." 


£80  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

"The  blessed  Apostles,  therefore,  (Peter  and  Paul,)  founding  and  arrang- 
ing the  (Roman)  church,  deUvcred  the  episcopate  for  governing  the  church  to 
Linus.  But  Anacletus  succeeds  to  him:  after  him,  in  the  third  place,  from 
the  apostlesy  Clement  obtains  the  episcopate." 

My  friend  has  said,  if  Cnrist  appointed  the  Popes  as  supreme, 
the  exercise  of  their  office  would  not  be  an  assumption — but  the 
appointment  is  the  very  matter  at  issue.  We  have  no  ground 
either  from  reason  or  scripture  to  prove,  that  the  Pope  should 
be  regarded  as  supreme  bishop.  As  to  the  supremacy  of  Peter: 
if  Peter  was  bishop  of  Rome,  is  it  not  remarkable,  that  Paul,  in 
writing  to  the  church  of  Rome,  should  not  mention  the  name  of 
Peter  ?  and  after  Paul  had  gone  to  that  city,  is  it  not  strange 
that  he  should  make  no  mention  of  Peter  in  his  epistles  written 
from  that  city  to  several  churches.  In  the  4th  of  Colossians, 
10th  and  11th  verse,  he  says,  that  only  Aristachus,  and  Mark, 
and  Justus,  were  his  helpers  in  the  kingdom  of  God  :  if  Peter 
had  been  at  Rome,  would  he  not  mention  him  as  a  fellow-helper? 
On  his  trial  all  fled, — (2  Timothy,  iv,  16.)  Are  we  to  suppose 
that  Peter  forsook  him  in  the  hour  of  his  extremity.  If  Peter 
.  were  really  the  bishop  of  Rome,  I  think  you  will  agree  with  me, 
that  he  was  at  least  non-resident.  I  am  told  by  Mr.  Maguire 
that  there  were  at  least  eleven  bad  Popes.  This  is  a  great 
acknowledgment.  Genebrard,  a  Roman  Catholic  writer,  how- 
ever, informs  us,  that 

"Per  annos  fere  150,  Pontifice  circiter  50,  a  Jonanne  scilicet  octavo  usque 
ad  Leonem  IX,  a  virtute  majorem  prorsus  defecerunt,  apostatici  potius  quam 
apostolici."  ^^  For  nearly  150  years,  about  fifty  Popes,  namely,  from  John  the 
8th  to  Leo  the  9th,  revolted  altogether  from  the  virtue  of  their  predecessors,  being 
rather  apostate  than  apostolic,''* 

So  that  we  have  about  50  bad  Popes  instead  of  11.  A  proof 
that  Pope  Honorius  was  a  Monotholite  heretic,  shall  appear  in 
the  printed  report.* 

My  friend  has  admitted,  that  there  is  no  such  officer 

IN    THE    church  OF    ChRIST  AS  A  SACRIFICING    PRIEST.       Mr. 

Maguire  has  quoted  a  passage  from  the  book  of  Malachy.  I 
hold  that  the  oblation  there  spoken  of,  is  the  sacrifice  of  praise 
and  thanksgiving,  and  spiritual  service  :  the  repitition  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  would  imply,  that  the  sacrifice  on  Calvary 
was  insufficient. 

♦The  following  passage  from  Dupin,  a  Roman  Catholic  historian,  is  given  in  proof 
of  the  above  statement : 

*'  The  Roman  church  has  so  plainly  acknowledged  that  Pope  Honorius  did  advance 
the  error  of  the  Monotholites,  that,  in  the  ancient  breviary,  she  declares  that  he  was 
condemned  with  the  other  Monotholites,  tor  maintaining  the  doctrine  of  one  will. 
*  *  ******* 

It  is  more  just  and  rational,  to  give  credit  to  the  one  general  council,  where  matters 
are  examined  to  the  bottom,  than  to  sentiments  of  some  private  men,  who  judge  of 
this  fact  according  to  their  own  interest  oi  prejudices.     This  will  stand  for  certain, 
Chen,  that  Honorius  was  condemned,  and  justlytoo,  as  an  heretic  by  the  6th  council. 
— Dupin's  Eccles.  Hist.  vol.  ii,  page  16,  3d  ed'tion,  Dublin,  1723. 


THE    PROIESTANT    CHURCHES.  281 

**I  beseech  you  by  the  mercies  of  God,  (saith  the  apostle)  that  ye  present 
Vcur  bodies  a  living  sacrifice,  holy  and  acceptable  unto  God,  which  is  your 
reasonable  service." — (Rom.  xii.  1.) 

I  called  your  attention  to  a  letter  which  I  had  received.  It  ia 
strange  that  the  same  idea  should  have  occurred  to  my  mind, 
relative  to  the  writer.  I  imagined,  that  it  came  from  a  friend 
of  Mr.  Maguire's.  I  here  solemnly  declare,  that  I  know  not 
the  author,  or  any  thing  whatever  of  the  matter,  save,  that  the 
letter  came  through  the  post-office  to  me.  I  will  now  show  you 
that  divisions  have  existed  in  the  church  of  Rome.  The  Fran- 
ciscans held  the  immaculate  conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the 
Dominicans  denied  it.  We  read  of  the  battles  between  the 
Dominicans  and  Jesuits  in  two  popedoms — the  Dominicans 
urging  the  doctrine  of  unconditional  degrees.  The  Jesuits  and 
Jansenists  maintained  a  warfare  from  1642  to  1705.  As  the 
members  of  the  church  at  Corinth  were  censured  by  the  Apostles 
^or  saying,  "I  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Cephas  ;" 
h">w  can  these  parties  escape  a  similar  censure,  by  their  prefer- 
ence for  one  person  as  their  peculiar  general — one  saying  I  am 
of  Benedict — another,  I  am  of  Francis — and  another,  1  am  of 
Dominick.  In  the  controversy  between  the  Jesuite  and  Janse- 
nists, there  appeared  from  the  press,  the  "  Torch  of  St.  Augus- 
tin,''  "Snuffers  for  St.  Augustin's  Torch,''  and  lastly,  "A  Gag 
for  the  Jansenists."  Soon  after  the  Bull  Unigenitus  was  issued, 
i!.nd  by  this  document  the  purest  part  of  the  church  of  Rome  was 
put  down — witness  the  demolition  of  Port  Royal. 

"  The  Bull  Unigenitus,"  says  that  most  learned  Roman  Catholic,  Doctor 
O'Connor,  "was  condemned  by  the  Sorbonne  immediately  after  the  death  of 
Louis ;  and  the  Jesuit  Le  Tellier,  the  Monarch's  confessor,  was  banished  to 
La  Fleche,  loaded  with  public  execration.  The  condemnation  of  the  ninety- 
first  proposition,  by  Us  enforcing  obedience  to  unjust  censures,  ivas  felt  to  be 
repugnant  to  moral  obligations.  The  refusal  of  the  sacraments  to  those  who 
would  not  subscribe  the  bull,  disturbed  the  tranquillity  of  private  life,  and 
caused  an  insurrection  of  the  magistracy,  so  that  those  who  persisted  in  the 
refusal,  were  banished  the  kingdom.  Benedict  the  fourteenth,  fearful  of  the 
storm  which  thickened  every  day,  issued  a  brief,  declaring  that,  since  he 
could  not  condemn  the  bulls  of  his  predecessors,  the  bull  should  be  registered, 
but  that  those  who  rejected  it,  ought  to  have  the  sacraments  at  their  own  risk. 

I  wonder,  under  such  circumstances,  what  priest  would  have 
administered  the  sacraments  1 

"  This  political  middle  course  was  called  the  law  of  silence,  and  caused  the 
greatest  scandal  of  all.  The  Parliaments,  disgusted  rather  than  edified  by 
this  pohtical  middle  course  in  matters  of  rehgioji,  protested  against  it,  and 
utterly  suppressed  the  bull,  as  repugnant  to  the  liberties  of  the  Gallican 
Church." — Columbanus,  6,  xx. 

My  friend  has  told  us,  that  the  Jesuits  and  Jansenists,  the 
Franciscans  and  Dominicans,  never  broke  the  bond  of  Chris- 
tian charity.     It  is  notorious  that  the  Jesuits,  and  the  secular  oi 

24* 


282  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

parish  priests,  are  not  on  the  most  amicable  terms,  the  lattei 
being  jealous  of  their  interference.  We  shall  see  how  thejF 
acted.  Parsons,  the  Jesuit,  writing  agiinst  tlie  secular  priests, 
thus  describes  them  : — 

•*They  be  mad  heads,  a^.ditious  libellers,  notorious  caluminators,  factious, 
turbulent,  of  scandalous  l:  res,  writing  egregious,  malicious  untruths ;  impu- 
dent, factious,  wicked  slanderers;  they  are  rebels  to,  and  betrayers  of  the 
Catholic  cause." — Parson^s  *Bpologue,  chap,  iv,  p.  8. 

On  the  other  side,  the  Seculars  called  the  Jesuits  **  Schisma- 
tics, Donatists,  Arians ;  who  make  religion  a  mere  political 
Atheistical.  devi(;e."     And  Watson  calls  Parsons 

"An  Atheal  strategemitor  (page  160,  Gtuodlibets ;)  a  bastardly  vicar  of 
hell ;  a  judge  paramount  on  earth  under  the  devil ;  a  Wolsey  in  ambition, 
Midas  in  immundicity,  a  traitor  in  action." 

And  again,  he  says  of  all  the  Jesuits  in  England,  that 
"  They  surfeited  sorer  than  Heliogabalus ;  that  they  were  taught  by  their 
Arch-Rabbis  to  maintain  (with  their  equivocations)  dissimulation,  detraction, 
sedition  ;  that  they  were  busied  in  making  strife  between  kings  and  kings, 
states  and  states,  priests  and  priests,  raising  rebellions,  murdering  princes, 
stirring  uproars  every  where ;  men  unworthy  to  be  called  religious  or  Catholic, 
or  Christian  ;  for,  however  they  may  boast  of  their  perfection,  their  holiness, 
their  meditation,  and  their  exercises,  yet  their  plots  are  heathenish  and  satani- 
cal,  fit  to  set  Machiavel,  Lucian  ;  yea,  Don  Lucifer  himself  to  school. 
Wretched  Jesuits,  who  would  have  all  Catholics  depend  on  the  arch-priest, 
when  the  arch-priest  depended  on  John  Garnet,  Garnet  upon  Parsons,  and 
Parsons  on  the  devil." 

Mr.  Maguire  says,  that  there  is  no  sacrificing  priest;  and 
yesterday,  in  accordance  with  the  doctrine  of  his  church,  he 
observed,  that  the  sacrifice  of  the  Eucharist  is  offered  in  an 
unbloody  manner.     I  beg  to  remind  him  that  the  Bible  says, 

"WITHOUT    SHEDDING    OF    BLOOD    THERE    IS    NO    REMISiSION." 

(Heb.  ix,  22.)  With  respect  to  transubstantiation,  I  beg  to 
read  you  an  extract  from  Gage's  Survey  of  the  W^est  Indies. 
Lon.  1655,  page  197  ;  formerly  a  priest  of  the  church  of  Rome. 

"  One  day,  saving  mass  in  the  chief  church,  after  the  consecration  of  the 
bread,  being  with  my  eyes  shut  at  that  mental  prayer,  which  the  church  of 
Rome  calleth  the  Memento  for  their  dead,  there  came  from  behind  the  altar 
a  mouse,  which  running  about,  came  to  the  very  bread  or  wafer-god  of  the 
Papists,  and  taking  it  in  his  mouth  ran  away  with  it ;  not  being  perceived  by 
any  of  the  people  who  were  at  mass,  for  that  the  altar  was  high  by  reason  of 
the  steps  going  up  to  it,  and  the  people  far  beneath.  But  as  soon  as  I  opened 
my  eyes  to  go  on  with  my  mass,  and  perceived  my  God  stolen  away,  I  looked 
about  the  altar  and  saw  the  mouse  running  away  with  it ;  which  on  a  sudden 
did  so  stupify  me,  that  I  knew  not  well  what  to  do  or  say ;  and  caUing  my 
wits  together,  I  thought  that  if  I  should  take  no  notice  of  the  mischance,  and 
any  body  else  in  the  church  should,  I  might  justly  be  questioned  by  the  In- 
quisition ;  but  if  I  should  call  on  the  people  to  look  for  the  sacrament,  then  I 
might  be  but  chid  and  rebuked  for  my  carelessness,  which,  of  the  two,  1 
thought  would  be  more  easily  borne  than  the  rigour  of  the  Inquisition. — 
Whereupon,  not  knowing  what  the  people  had  seen,  I  turned  myself  unto 
them,  and  called  thorn  nntf  the  altar,  and  told  them  plainly,  that  whil;it  I  was 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  28? 

in  my  memmto  prayers  and  meditations,  a  mouse  had  carried  away  the- 
sacrament;  and  that  I  knew  not  what  to  do,  unless  tbey  would  help  me  to 
find  it  out  again.  The  people  called  a  priest  that  was  alt  hand,  who  presently 
brought  in  more  of  his  coat;  and,  as  if  their  God  by  this  had  been  eaten  up, 
they  presently  prepared  to  find  out  the  thief,  as  if  they  would  eat  up  the 
mouse  that  had  so  assaulted  and  abused  their  God.  '1  hey  lighted  candles 
and  torches  to  find  out  the  malefactor  in  his  secret  and  hidden  places  of  the 
wall ;  and  after  much  searching  and  enquiry  for  the  sacrilegious  beast,  they 
found  at  last  in  a  hole  of  the  wall,  the  sacrament,  half  eaten  up,  which,  with 
great  joy,  they  took  out ;  and,  as  if  the  ark  had  been  brought  again  from  tlie 
Philistines  to  the  Israelites,  so  they  rejoiced  for  their  new-found  God,  whom, 
with  many  people  now  resorted  to  the  church,  with  many  lights  of  candles 
and  torches,  with  joyful  and  solemn  music  they  carried  about  the  church  in 
procession.  Myself  was  present  upon  my  knees,  shaking  and  quivering  for 
what  might  be  done  unto  me,  and  expecting  my  doom  and  judgment ;  and 
as  the  sacrament  passed  by  me,  i  observed  in  it  the  marks  and  signs  of  the 
teeth  of  the  mouse,  as  they  are  to  be  seen  in  a  piece  of  cheese  gnawn  an^i 
eaten  by  it. 

"  This  struck  me  with  such  horror,  that  I  cared  not  at  that  present  moment 
whether  I  had  been  torn  in  a  thousand  pieces,  for  denying  pubhcly  that 
mouse-eaten  God ;  I  called  to  my  best  memory  all  philosophy  concernina 
substance  and  accident,  and  resolved  within  myself  that  what  i  saw  gnawn, 
was  not  an  accident,  but  some  real  substance,  eaten  and  devoured  by  that 
vermin,  which  certainly  was  fed  and  nourished  by  what  it  had  eaten ;  and 
philosophy  well  teacheth,  "substantia  cibi  (non  accidentis)  convertitur  in 
substantiam  aliti:"  the  substance  {not  the  accident  of  the  food  or  meat)  is  con- 
verted 01  turned  into  the  substance  of  the  thing  fed  by  it  and  alimented.  Now, 
here  I  knew  that  this  mouse  had  fed  upon  some  substance,  or  else  how  couk. 
the  marks  of  the  teeth  so  plainly  appear  ?  But  no  Papist  will  be  willing  tc 
answer  that  it  fed  on  the  substance  of  Christ's  body — ergo,  by  good  conse- 
quence it  follows,  that  it  fed  upon  the  substance  of  bread  ;  and  so  transub- 
stantiation  here,  in  my  judgment,  was  confuted  by  a  mouse;  which  mean 
and  base  creature  God  chose  to  convince  me  of  my  former  errors,  and  made 
me  now  resolve  upon  what  many  years  before  I  had  doubted,  that  certainly 
the  point  of  transubstantiation,  taught  by  the  church  of  Rome,  is  most  dam- 
nable and  erroneous ;  for,  besides  what  before,  I  observed,  it  contradicteth 
the  philosophical  axiom  teaching  that  "duo  contradictoria  non  possint  simul 
et  semel  de  eodem  verificari,"  tioo  contradictories  cannot  at  once  and  at  the  self 
same  time  be  said  and  ve^-ijied  of  the  same  thing;  but  here  it  was  so ;  for  here 
in  Rome's  judgment  and  opinion,  Christ's  body  was  gnawn  and  eaten,  and 
at  the  same  time  the  same  body,  in  another  place,  and  upon  another  altar,  in 
the  hands  of  another  priest,  was  not  eaten  and  gnawn ;  therefore  here  are 
two  contradictories  verified  of  the  same  body  of  Christ — to  wit,  it  was  eaten 
and  gnawn,  and  it  was  not  eaten  and  gnawn.  These  impressions  at  that 
time  were  so  great  in  me,  that  I  resolved  within  myself  that  bread  really  and 
truly  was  eaten  upon  that  altai,  and  by  no  means  Christ's  glorious  body 
which  is  in  heaven,  and  cannot  be  upon  earth  subject  to  the  hunger  or  vio 
lence  of  a  creature." 

From  the  circumstance  which  I  now  read,  we  can  clearly  see 
that  transubstantiation  has  no  foundation  in  fact. 

In  the  next  place,  permit  me  to  remark,  if  a  church  be  an^ 
swerable  for  all  who  break  from  her  communion,  then  is  the 
church  of  Rome  answerable,  upon  her  own  showing,  for  the 
various  heresies  which  have  from  time  to  time  existed.  She 
will  not  perhaps  assent  to  this  doctrine ;  why  therefore  should 
ehe  charg ;  c.rj  Protestant  communion  with  the  faults  of  thosa 


.i84  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OP 

,  who  depart  out  of  it  ?  If  the  mother  be  not  anuwerable  fot  the 
brood  which  leave  her,  then  no  Protestant  church  is  answerable 
but  for  those  within  its  pale. 

Upon  the  authority  of  J.  K.  L.  it  is  evident  that  there  are 
differences  in  the  church  of  Rome.  Scarcely  had  he  entered  a 
foreign  univernity  for  the  completion  of  his  studies,  when  he 
himself  informs  us,  that  he — 

"Found  himself  surrounded  by  the  disciples  or  admirers  of  D'Alembert, 
Rosseau,  and  Voltaire ;  that  he  frequently  traversed  in  company  with  them 
the  halls  of  the  Inquisition,  and  discussed  in  the  area  of  the  holy  office  those 
arguments  and  sophisms,  for  the  suppression  of  which  this  awful  tribunal  was 
ostensibly  employed ;  and  that  at  that  time,  the  ardour  of  youth,  the  genius  of 
the  place,  the  spirit  of  the  times,  as  well  as  the  examples  of  his  companions, 
prompted  him  to  inquire  into  all  things,  and  to  deliberate,  whether  he  should 
take  his  station  among  the  infidels,  or  remain  attached  to  Christianity." 
Letters  on  the  State  of  Ireland,  by  J.  K.  L.  1825,  p.  55. 

Such  is  the  authority  from  J.  K.  L.  I  assert,  that  the  church 
of  Rome  is  divided  as  to  a  standard  Bible.  The  council  of 
Trent  gave  its  opinion,  and  pronounced  its  imprimatur,  on  an 
edition  of  the  Vulgate,  before  it  was  pubhshed  !  "  Quam  emen- 
datissime  imprimatur,"  are  the  words  of  the  council.  The 
expression,  "  quam  emendatissime,"  "  as  correct  as  possible^'''' 
implies  the  inability  of  the  church  of  Rome  to  furnish  an  infalli- 
ble edition.  I  asserted  that  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine  editions 
differed  in  two  thousand  places.  Mr.  Maguire  says  that  he  has 
a  copy  of  the  Sixtine  Bible.  I  again  call  upon  him  to  produce 
it.  I  shall  now  read  to  you  an  extract,  in  order  to  show  that  he 
will  find  great  difficulty  in  producing  a  copy : 

"Biblia  Sacra,  Vulgata  Edit.  Sixti  r,*jussu  reco^nita  atque  edita  Roijn, 
typis  Vatic,  fol.  This  is  the  remarkable  edition  of  Sixtus  V,  suppressed  by 
his  successor  Clement  VIII,  who  reprinted  it  in  1592  more  correctly.  This 
has  corrections  pasted  over  it  in  great  abundance :  and  nothing  but  its  great 
rarity  makes  it  bring  any  price.  This  celebrated  and  scarce  edition  of  the 
Bible  is  called  Sixtus  the  Fifth's,  having  been  translated  and  printed  under 
the  direction  of  that  pontiff.  As  soon  as  it  appeared,  it  made  a  considerable 
noise  in  the  church ;  but  on  account  of  the  many  alterations  from  the  ordi- 
nary text,  it  was  suppressed  and  proscribed  after  the  death  of  Sixtus.  The 
Duke  of  Grafton  purchased  one  on  large  paper,  at  Mr.  Paris's  sale,  for  64/. 
5s.  Od. — (Dr.  Adam  Clarke's  Bibliographical  Dictionary,  vol.  i,  p.  202.) 

Let  Mr.  Maguire  now  produce  his  Sixtine  Bible. 

Divisions  exist  in  the  church  of  Rome,  as  to  the  extent  of 
the  temporal  power  of  the  Pope.  On  this  subject  Bellarmine 
tells  us — 

"  There  are  three  opinions.  First,  that  the  Pope,  by  divine  right,  has  an 
unlimited  power  (plenissnnam  potestatem;  over  the  whole  world  in  political 
as  well  as  ecclesiastical  matters.  A  second  opinion  (which  he  calls  a  heresy, 
rather  than  an  opinion)  is  in  the  opposite  extreme ;  that  tlie  Pope  has  not  by 
divine  right,  any  temporal  power ;  nor  can  in  any  way  command  secular 
princes,  much  less  depose  them,  even  though  they  may  deserve  to  be  other- 
wise deposed :  nay,  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  God  that  the  spiritual 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES.  285 

and  temporal  swords  be  both  committed  to  the  same  hand.  The  third 
opinion  lies  between  the  two  former,  and  is  commonly  held  by  Catholic  divines; 
namely,  that  the  Pope,  as  Pope,  has  not  directly  and  immediately  any  tem- 
poral, but  only  a  spiritual  power;  nevertheless,  that  by  reason  of  the  spiritual^ 
he  has  at  least  indirectly,  a  certain  power,  and  that  supreme  in  temporals.'''' — Da 
Rom.  Pont.  1.  iv,  c.  5.  §  15. 

The  council  of  Lyons  maintained  the  right  of  the  Pope  to 
depose  princes.  If  I  were  a  Roman  Catholic,  and  were  anxious 
to  know  whether  the  Pope  possessed  that  right,  although  if  a 
Trans-alpine,  I  must  believe  the  doctrine,  how  can  I  reconcile 
it  with  the  declaration  of  the  Apostle  : 

"  He  that  resisteth  the  power,  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God ;  and  they 
that  resist,  purchase  to  themselves  damnation ;  for  princes  are  not  a  terror  to 
the  good  work  but  to  the  evil." — Rom.  xiii,  1,  2,  3. 

Delahogue  endeavours  to  get  out  of  difficulties  of  this  nature, 
by  saying, 

"  The  church  wished  to  define  nothing  concerning  the  celebrated  contro- 
versy between  the  French  and  Italian  churches,  as  is  evident  from  those 
things  which  were  done  in  the  council  of  Trent,  and  from  what  we  shall 
mention  in  the  article  concerning  the  prerogatives  of  the  Roman  pontiff 
Therefore  neither  of  these  definitions  is  sufficiently  clear  to  demand  assent : 
hence  different  opinions  concerning  this  question  do  not  militate  against  unity 
of  doctrine,  which  consists  in  this,  that  all  doctrines  are  assented  to,  which 
have  been  clearly  defined  by  a  council  assuredly  general." — p.  51.  certo 
cecumenica. 

So  that  a  man  is  left  in  doubt  on  such  momentous  points,  by 
an  infallible  church,  she  not  having  defined  the  matter  with 
sufficient  clearness :  a  man  therefore  may  maintain  opinions 
different  from  those  of  others  without  any  breach  of  unity. 
Upon  the  authority  of  Dr.  Doyle,  there  is  no  standard  as  to 
doctrine  in  the  church  of  Rome.  In  his  examination  on  oath 
before  the  House  of  Lords,  p.  502,  he  observes, 

"  Besides  the  articles  enumerated  in  the  creed  of  Pius  IV,  there  are  others 
to  be  received  as  of  faith.  These  are  defined  in  the  sacred  canons  of  which 
iojue  are  received  entire,  some  in  part,  and  of  which  no  account  can  be  obtained 
from  the  formularies  to  which  the  Roman  Catholic  bishops  have  referred  as 
authentic." 

Dr.  Doyle  here  states  that  some  of  the  sacred  canons  are  to 
be  received  entire,  some  in  part.  Who  then  is  to  decide,  what 
canons  are  to  be  received,  and  what  rejected?  How,  I  would 
ask,  is  the  ignorant  peasant  to  decide]  Is  he  to  go  to  his  priest? 
The  matter,  in  truth,  resolves  itself  into  this,  that  the  priest  is 
the  infallible  organ  of  the  church  in  the  estimation  of  the  people. 
The  differences  in  the  church  of  Rome  are  also  great  as  tQ 
councils.  The  French  church  receives  the  council  of  Con- 
stance in  toiOj  others  do  not.  Bellarmine  gives  us  the  varieties 
of  opinion  as  to  general  councils.  He  furnishes  a  list  of  general 
councils,  partly  confirmed  and  partly  rejected ;  (De  Concilii^ 
J-  i,  c.  G.)  and  (in  c.  v.  and  de  Rom.  Pont.  1.  iv,  c.  11,)  he  sajs 


286  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY     JP 

that  those  councils  allowed  to  be  general  were  njurcd  by  tha 
interpolations  of  heretics.  The  council  of  Basil  once  oecume- 
nical, afterwards  became,  we  are  told,  a  schismatical  conventi- 
cle.— (Bellarmine  de  Eccl.  Mil.  c.  16.)  Is  there  then  any 
standard  of  faith  to  be  found  in  that  church  in  which  such  doubts 
exist,  as  to  its  councils  and  canons. 

The  council  of  Constance,  the  Pope's  legate  concuning, 
decreed  that  a  council  was  above  the  Pope. — (Bellarm.  de  Rom. 
Pont.  1.  ii,  c.  11.)  That  of  Constance  deposed  three  Popes, 
and  set  up  another ;  while  the  council  of  Florence  and  Trent 
decreed,  that  the  Pope  is  above  a  council.  Here  we  have 
council  against  council.  He  has  not  informed  us,  what  are  the 
characteristics  of  a  general  council.  Is  it  the  orthodoxy  of  jhe 
doctrine  which  is  to  characterize  a  council,  or  is  it  the  council 
which  is  to  characterize  the  doctrine  ?  If  the  former,  why  should 
the  council  of  Tyre  be  rejected,  which  was  summoned  by  the 
same  authority  as  that  of  Nice  1  If  the  latter,  who  is  to  decid« 
upon  the  characteristics  of  a  general  council  1 

Thus  I  have  gone  in  some  degree  over  the  same  ground  of 
argument  that  I  traversed  the  second  day ;  by  which  I  showed 
you  that  infallibility  does  not  exist  in  the  church  of  Rome. 
Some  of  the  arguments  which  destroy  its  claim  to  infallibility, 
it  is  plain,  overturn  its  pretensions  to  unity.  The  first  councii 
of  Lyons  has  been  doubted  by  some.  The  fifth  Lateran  by 
others.  The  fifth  council,  assembled  at  Constantinople,  was 
held  in  defiance  of  Pope  Vigilius ;  yet  it  has  been  received  by 
his  successors ;  and  in  fine  throughout  "  the  church"  as  ai 
oecumenical  council.  Vide  Baron,  in  Justiniano  et  Vigilio 
tom.  7,  et  Sirmund.  Praefat.  in  Secund. 

Let  Mr.  Maguire  come  to  the  point — let  him,  if  he  please, 
bring  forward  his  catalogue  of  sects,  and  his  stories  about  fana- 
ticism ;  but  let  him  also  answer  my  questions,  why  councils 
have  been  against  councils  ?  and  how  his  church  can  escape  the 
anathema,  which  the  council  of  Ephesus  pronounced  on  any 
who  should  add  to  .the  Nicene  confession  of  faith  ? 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  called  upon  my  friend  Mr.  Pope  to  prove 
that  there  is  a  distinction  drawn  in  scripture  between  essentials 
and  non-essentials.  What  he  has  adduced  from  St.  Paul  to  the 
Corinthians  makes  against  him.  St.  Paul  rebukes  the  Corin- 
thians because  some  amongst  them  said  they  were  of  Paul, 
others  of  Cephas,  others  of  Apollos,  and  others  of  Christ ;  and 
he  condemns  their  indulging  in  such  frivolous  contests.  But 
faith,  morality,  and  discipline  had  not  been  violated,  and  it  is 
very  foolish  to  bring  this  text  forward  as  a  proof  that  difl^erences 
i-ere  allowed  to  exist.     St.  Paul  on  all  occasions  insisted  upoa 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES.  28'^ 

the  necessity  of  charity  ;  he  tells  us  himself,  that  if  he  possessed 
faith  sufficient  to  move  mountains — that  is,  a  faith  of  the  strongest 
description — and  had  not  charity,  it  would  profit  him  nothing. 
In  this  instance  the  Corinthians  were  guilty  of  a  breach  of  charity, 
not  of  faith  or  discipline ;  they  were  making  contentions  and 
divisions  as  to  the  superior  preaching  of  Paul  or  of  Cephas,  and 
St.  Paul  calls  upon  them  equally  to  give  up  such  frivolous  con- 
tentions, and  to  Uve  in  charity.  This  text,  though  quoted  by 
Mr.  Pope,  obviously  makes  against  him,  for  here  we  iind  the 
Corinthians  condemned  for  differences  which  did  not  involve 
matters  of  faith,  morality,  or  discipline. 

The  arguments  adduced  by  Mr.  Pope  against  my  church,  are 
founded  upon  a  great  misconception  of  her  doctrines.  He  has 
throughout  manifested  a  surprising  ignorance  of  her  real  tenets. 
He  has  resorted  to  a  negative  argument  to  prove  a  positive  fact. 
Because  St.  Paul,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans  does  not  speak 
of  Peter,  therefore  Peter  was  never  at  Rome.  Because  St. 
Paul  wrote  an  epistle  to  the  Romans  relative  to  the  discharge 
of  their  moral  and  spiritual  duties,  and  helped  Peter  in  his  mis- 
.  sion,  therefore  St.  Peter  was  not  the  successor  of  Jesus  Christ 
upon  earth. — A  notable  conclusion  truly  ! 

I  affirm  that  our  Saviour  appointing  a  visible  head  for  his 
church  upon  earth,  acted  in  nowise  derogatory  to  his  heavenly 
character,  but  did  that  which  was  worthy  of  divine  wisdom. 
My  friend,  by  negative  arguments,  seeks  to  deprive  us  of  a 
visible  head — now  Catholics  acknowledge  the  Pope  to  be  the 
successor  of  St.  Peter,  the  visible  head  of  the  church  on  earth, 
and  the  agent  and  instrument  of  the  invisible  head,  Jesus  Christ, 
who  is  hoayen.  You  are  to  decide  whether  you  will  believe  the 
holy  Fathers,  or  my  friend  Mr.  Pope — you  must  reject  either 
one  or  other,  tor  they  are  directly  opposed.  Mr.  Pope  has 
made  a  quotation  from  Genebrardus.  1  affirm  that  if  the  context 
of  the  author  be  examined,  it  will  not  be  found  to  prove  any 
thing  against  Catholic  doctrine.  Mr.  Pope  seeks  to  establish 
the  fact  of  disunion  in  the  church  by  a  reference  to  the  battles 
amongst  the  Jesuits  and  Dominicans  on  the  subject  of  the  Con- 
ception. With  regard  to  every  thing  which  has  not  been  defined 
by  the  Catholic  church,  every  Catholic  is  at  liberty  to  entertain 
his  private  opinions  ;  tne  church  has  not  thought  proper  to  define 
any  thing  but  what  is  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  the  de- 
posit of  faith.  Mr.  Pope  recurs  to  the  argument  relative  to  the 
sacrificing  prieste  I  have  already  said,  that  taking  the  words  in 
the  strict  and  rigorous  sense,  Christ  can  alone  be  called  the 
sacrificing  priest.  He  is  the  Assistans  Pontifex  futurorum 
bonorum.  Christ  himself  is  both  the  priest  and  the  victim,  or 
ti^  St   Augustin  has  it,  he  is  the  priest  himself  offering,  and 


288  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

himself  the  victim.  The  priest  pronounces  the  words  :  Christ 
performs  the  action,  therefore  the  priest  himself  does  not  tran- 
substantiate. With  regard  to  Columbanus,  I  deny  that  he  is  to 
be  quoted  on  this  subject  as  an  authority  against  the  Catholic 
church.  His  lucubrations  on  this  subject  have  not  been  ap- 
proved of.  It  is  remarkable,  that  Mr.  Pope  quotes  as*  Catholic 
historians  those  only  who  have  risen  in  opposition  to  the  recog- 
nised and  lawful  authority  of  the  church. 

I  now  come  to  the  man  who  was  converted  by  the  mouse. 
What  a  powerful  argument  against  the  doctrine  of  transubstan- 
tiation  !  Mr.  Pope  imagines  that  he  has  caught  me  in  a  mouse- 
trap, but  I  will  show  that  I  can  squeeze  myself  out  of  it.  I 
worship  a  Saviour,  who  suffered  himself  to  be  spat  upon  and  to 
be  scoffed  at.  In  his  divine  humility  he  endured  all,  and  would 
not  retaliate  upon  his  enemies.  He  was  treated  as  a  common 
malefactor — he  was  crucified  on  the  cross  between  two  thieves — 
he  was  covered  with  every  species  of  indignity  and  contumely, 
yet  he  prayed  to  his  heavenly  Father  to  forgive  his  enemies,  for 
they  knew  not  what  they  did.  He  was  a  scandal  to  the  Jews, 
and  a  folly  to  the  Gentiles.  The  indignities  which  our  Saviour 
suffered  from  the  Jews,  should  be  an  argument,  according  to 
the  principles  of  Mr.  Pope,  against  the  divinity  of  the  Redeemer 
— an  argument  which  has  been  plausibly  put  forward,  both  by 
Jews  and  Gentiles.  He  says,  the  church  of  Rome  is  answera- 
ble for  all  heretics.  They  had  been  her  adopted  children,  no 
doubt,  but  they  abused  their  right — they  rejected  her  authority, 
and  she  banished  them  from  her  on  account  of  their  scandalous 
conduct,  as  rebellious  and  unnatural  children.  They  are  gone 
out  from  her.  He  who  left  the  ark  of  Noah  was  drowned  in 
the  deluge. 

I  defy  my  friend  to  point  out  any  substantive  error  in  the  Six- 
tine  edition  of  the  Bible,  or  to  prove  that  any  material  alterations 
were  made  in  the  Clementine  edition.  The  council  of  Trent 
commanded  that  a  copy  should  be  made  out  guam  emendaiissime. 
Though  there  was  nothing  substantially  erroneous  in  the  edition 
then  extant,  yet  it  required  many  verbal  emendations  :  accord- 
ingly, as  he  ought,  Clement  had  a  pure  and  correct  copy  of  the 
Bible  made  out.  Mr.  Pope  has  recurred  to  the  question  of  infal- 
libility, but  I  shall  not  be  drawn  by  such  a  manoeuvre  from  the 
subject  before  us.  The  doctrine  of  the  priest  may  be  infallibly 
true,  although  he  himself  may  be  very  fallible.  The  priest  is  the 
organ  of  infallibility,  as  long  as  he  teaches  the  true  doctrine  of 
the  Catholic  church  ;  and  I  here  publicly  assure  you,  that  if  a 
priest  broached  any  doctrine  contrary  to  that  church,  when  preach- 
ing from  his  altar,  the  people  would  close  their  ears  against  th-e 
new  doctrine,  and   either  turn  him  out  of  the   chattel  or  retire 


THE    PROTESTAPtT    CHURCHES.  289 

themselves.  Mr.  Pope  has  again  alluded  to  the  general  coun- 
cils, and  has  endeavoured  to  raise  some  cavilUng  objectior  s  with 
respect  to  the  council  of  Basil.  Though  that  council  had  been 
lawfully  convened,  yet,  when  eighty-nine  Arian  bishops  were 
introduced  by  the  Emperor,  the  Catholic  bishops  left  the  assem- 
bly, and  refused  to  sit  in  council  with  the  heretics.  This  is  the 
council,  forsooth,  which  Mr.  Pope  quotes  against  me  !  I  already 
told  you,  that  in  the  .commencement  the  council  was  regularly 
convened,  and  therefore  legitimate.  Here  lies  the  quibble  of 
my  ingenious  friend.  But  the  junta  of  Arian  bishops  created 
disgust  and  alarm  in  the  minds  of  the  orthodox  bishops,  and  they 
accordingly  quitted  the  heretical  assembly.  I  have  here  a  list 
which  T  shall  now  read  to  you,  containing  an  enumeration  of  the 
various  Protestant  sectarians  : 

"  Lutherans,  Calvinists,  Agricolists,  Anabaptists,  Re-baptizers,  Storkitee, 
Carlostadians,  the  three  latter  banished  from  Wittemberg  by  Luther  for  heresy, 
Muncer  (executed  for  rebelhon  ;  7000  Anabaptists  killed  :)  Adamites,  A.po9- 
lolics,  Tacitums,  Perfects,  Innocents,  Libertines,  Sabattarians,  Clancularians, 
Manifestarians,  Weepers,  Rejoicers,  Indifferents,  Sanguinarians,  Antima- 
rians  (a  sect  of  Anabaptists;)  Anidronicans,  Antitrinitarians,  Bacularians 
(a  sect  of  Anabaptists,  who  deemed  it  a  crime  to  have  any  other  weapon 
than  a  staff;)  Puritans,  (a  sect  of  rigid  Calvinists,  that  indulged  in  various 
absurdities  ;  some  have  killed  cats  for-xjatching  mice  on  a  Sunday,  but  scru- 
pulously deferred  the  execution  till  Monday ;  others  have  knocked  out  the 
heads  of  their  barrels  of  beer  for  working  on  a  Sunday,  &c,  &c, ;)  Ctuakers, 
Rustics,  Insurrectionists,  Sandemanians,  by  John  Glass — Kiss-of-charity 
boys,  Love-feasts,  Seceders,  Shakers,  Socinians,  Southcottians,  Swedenbor- 
gians,  or  New  Jerusalemites,  Theophilanthropists,  headed  by  Tom  Paine, 
Universalists,  or  Salvation  every  where,  Ubiquitarians,  Zuinglians,  Muggle- 
tonians,  New-hghts,  Seekers,  Armenians,  David-Georgians,  their  author  pro- 
claimed himself  the  Messiah,  Tunkers  (not  Tinkers,)  they  deny  eternal 
punishment.  Episcopalians,  Famihsts,  or  Family  of  Love,  their  author  held 
himself  above  Christ,  Fifth-monarchy-men,  Illuminati,  Inspired  boys,  Inde- 
pendents, Infernalians,  held  Jesus  went  to  hell  and  was  tormented  there, 
Johnsonians,  denjr  the  Trinity  and  pre-existence  of  Christ,  Jumpers,  Groan- 
ers,  Laughers,  Latitudinarians,  Methodists,  Robinsonians,Brownists,  Ranters, 
Baptists,  Pedobaptists,  cum  multus  aliis." 

Here  we  find  tinkers  and  cobblers,  and  other  such  persons, 
setting  up  as  the  preachers  of  the  word  of  God.  Every  one  of 
those  sects  contends  bitterly  against  the  principles  of  the  others 
and  all  of  them  differ  more  from  each  other  than  we  do  from  the 
church  of  England. 

Mr.  Pope  has  retailed  to  you  a  blasphemous  story  relative  to 
the  blessed  Eucharist,  upon  the  credit  of  an  apostate  priest.  I 
think  it  quite  unworthy  of  a  foTmal  reply.  I  shall  merely  give 
you  the  following  story  by  way  of  antithesis — it  describes  pretty 
accurarely  the  frantic  fits  produced  by  the  imaginary  workings 
of  a  certain  spirit  upon  the  imagination,  highly  sublimated  with 
the  pride  and  self-importance  cf  private  judgment  The  story 
IS  related  of  a  pious  Puritan,  who,  in  the  presence  of  our  tra\  eller, 

25 


290  THE  WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

had  executed  holy  justice  on  his  favourite  cat  for  an  irnp'ouE 
violation  of  the  Sabbath — 

Veni  Banbury,  oh !  profanum ! 
Ubi  vide  Puritanurr* 
Felem  facientera  fiirem 
duia  Sabbato  stravit  murem. 
Arrived  at  Banbury,  oh !  profane ! 
I  there  beheld  a  Puritan, 
In  pious  rage  hang  up  torn  cat 
For  catching  on  Lord's  day  a  rat 

I  shall  now  read  to  you  an  extract  from  Dudithius,  a  learned 
Protestant  divine,  in  his  epistle  to  Beza : 

"  What  sort  of  people  are  our  Protestants,  struggling  to  and  fro,  and  carriea 
about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine,  sometimes  to  this  side,  sometimes  to  that  7 
You  may,  perhaps,  know  what  their  sentiments  in  matters  of  religion  are  to- 
day ;  but  you  can  never  certainly  tell  what  they  will  be  to-morrow.  In  what 
article  of  religion  do  these  churches  agree  which  have  cast  off  the  bishop  of 
Rome  ?  Examine  all  from  top  to  bottom,  and  you  will  scarce  find  one  thing 
affirmed  by  one,  which  was  not  immediately  condemned  by  another  for 
wicked  doctrine." 

The  same  confusion  of  opinions  was  described  by  an  English 
Protestant,  the  learned  Dr.  Walton,  about  the  middle  of  last 
century,  in  his  preface  to  his  Polyglott,  where  he  says — 

"  Aristarchus  heretofore  could  scarce  find  seven  wise  men  in  Greece  ;  but 
with  us,  scarce  are  to  be  found  so  many  idiots.  For  all  are  doctors,  all  are 
divinely  learned  ;  there  is  not  so  much  as  the  meanest  fanatic  or  jackpudding, 
who  does  not  give  you  his  own  dreams  for  the  word  of  God.  The  bottomless 
pit  seems  to  have  been  set  open,  from  whence  a  smoke  has  arisen  which  has 
darkened  the  heavens  and  the  stars,  and  locusts  have  come  out  with  stings,  a 
numerous  race  of  sectaries  and  heretics,  who  have  renewed  all  the  ancient 
heresies,  and  invented  many  monstrous  opinions  of  their  own.  These  have 
filled  our  cities,  villages,  camps,  houses,  nay,  our  pulpits  too,  and  lead  the 
poor  deluded  people  with  them  to  the  pit  of  perdition." 

Such  is  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Walton,  who  will  not  be  considered 
a  light  authority  on  the  subject.  I  can  also  produce  another  ex- 
cellent Protestant  authority  to  the  same  effect: — no  less  than  that 
of  Baxter,  the  great  oracle  and  organ  of  the  sect  of  Puritans  : — 

"  He  who  is  out  of  the  church  is  without  the  teaching,  the  holy  worship, 
the  prayers  and  discipline  of  the  church  ;  and  is  out  of  the  way  where  the 
spirit  doth  come ;  and  out  of  the  society  which  Christ  is  related  to.  For  he 
is  the  Saviour  of  the  body ;  and  if  once  we  leave  his  hospital,  we  cannot 
expect  the  presence  and  help  of  the  physician.  Nor  will  he  be  pilot  to  them 
that  leave  his  ship  ;  nor  captain  to  them  that  separate  from  his  army.  Out 
of  the  ark  there  is  nothing  but  a  deluge  ;  and  no  place  of  rest,  or  safety  for 
his  soul." 

In  1645,  the  collected  body  of  ministers  protested  solemnly 
against  the  toleration  of  sects  :  and  in  their  remonstrance  they 
say, 

"  We  detest  and  abhor  the  so-much-endeavoured  toleration." 

And  in  a  provincial  assembly,  they  denominate  schism  a 
"  soul  poison," 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES.  Wl 

111  another  provincial  meeting  they  call  it  : 

"  A  sword  in  a  madman's  hand  ;  a  cup  of  poison  in  the  hands  of  a  child  ; 
a  city  of  refuge  in  men's  consciences  for  the  devil  to  fly  to." 

In  short,  this,  compressed  into  one  word,  was  the  general  senti- 
ment ;  therefore  the  general  language  of  these  men  w^as,  that 

"  Schism  is  a  damnable  sin,  and  whatsoever  is  contrary  to  the  gospel  can 
have  no  right,  and  therefore  should  have  no  liberty." 

Again,  I  have  the  authority  of  the  learned  Bayle  for  the 
destructive  and  ruinous  consequences  of  schism  : 

"  I  do  not  know  (says  he)  where  one  could  possibly  find  out  a  more  grie- 
vous sin  than  is  that  of  rending  the  mystical  body  of  Jesus  Christ ;  of  that 
spouse  which  he  has  purchased  at  the  expense  of  his  own  blood  ;  of  that 
mother  whom  he  has  begotten  in  God  ;  who  feeds  us  with  that  milk  of  under- 
standing, which  is  devoid  of  fraud:  and  conducts  us  in  the  path  which  leads  to 
eternal  happiness.  What  crime  can  indeed  be  possibly  greater  than  to  rise 
up  against  such  a  parent ;  to  defame  her  through  the  world  ;  and  to  make 
her  children,  when  they  can  do  it,  rebel  against  her  ;  tear  them  by  thousands 
from  her  womb,  in  order  to  drag  them  to  eternal  flames  ;  and  not  only  them, 
but  their  posterity  forever.  Where  does  there  exist  a  crime  of  high  treason 
against  God,  if  it  be  not  here  ?  A  husband  who  loves  his  wife,  and  is  at  the 
satne  time  assured  of  her  virtue,  considers  himself  more  mortally  wounded 
by  the  calumnies  and  libels  that  would  make  her  pass  for  a  prostitute,  than 
he  would  by  any  injuries  proclaimed  and  published  against  himself.  Amidst 
all  the  crimes  into  which  a  subject  can  fall,  there  is  not  any  one  more  grieviouB 
than  that  of  rebelling  against  his  lawful  sovereign,  and  endeavouring  at  the 
same  time  to  excite  as  many  provinces  as  he  can  to  dethrone  him.  Now 
precisely  in  the  same  proportion  as  supernatural  interests  exceed  all  temporal 
mterests,  just  so  does  the  church  of  Christ  surpass  all  civil  societies.  And  the 
consequence,  therefore,  is,  that  schism  in  the  church  exceeds  in  the  greatness 
of  its  criminality,  the  guilt  of  all  other  acts  of  sedition." 

"  Schism,  (says  Mr.  Wix,)  does  not  prevail  merely  out  of  the  church.  It 
abounds  within  it.  And  among  those  who  profess  themselves  its  members, 
very  little  attachment  to  it  is  to4)e  found.  It  is,  moreover,  most  seriously  to 
be  lamented,  that  very  many  of  those,  who  boast  the  warmest  attachment  to 
her  docirines,  have  arrogated  to  themselves  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel,  in 
a  sense,  which  excludes  all  others  from  a  due  conception  of  it,  whose  opin- 
ions, or  feelings,  accord  not  with  their  own.  In  consequence  of  this,  we 
observe  much  spiritual  disorder  ;  a  variety  of  opinions  of  faith,  and  discipline 
both  in  the  church,  and  out  of  the  church.  And  thus  the  greatest  injury  is 
inflicted  on  the  unity  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ." 

Such,  too,  is  the  language  of  many  other  writers  of  the 
establishment. 

"  The  establishment,  (said  one  of  its  most  eloquent  prelates)  is  a  tree,  that 
\a  shivering  to  pieces  with  wedges  made  out  of  itself." 

Dr.  Daubeney,  a  Protestant  divine,  speaking  of  the  Methodists, 

says, 

"  They  are  a  set  of  ignorant,  self-sufl3cient  enthusiasts,  industriously  push- 
mg  themselves  into  every  parish,  creeping  into  houses,  and  leading  captive 
those  silly  persons  who  are  weak  enough  to  be  led  by  them.  They  are, 
many  of  them,  of  so  low  a  description,  as  to  be  obliged  to  substitute  their 
marks  for  their  names." 

"  In  this  country  (observes  M.  Stykes)  vast  sums  of  money  are  gained  by 
schism  ;  and  prodigious  collections  are  annually  made  for  the  support  of  its 
r^  nisters.     Inferior  persons,  assuming  the  situation  of  teachery,  are  leaders 


292  THE    WANT    OF    UlNITY    OF 

of  the  multitude  — Thus  in  the  worship  of  calves,  (1  Kings,  jji,  33)  thepriesta 
were  made  of  th  3  lowest  of  the  people.  It  would  now  seem,  havmg  preach- 
ers of  all  sorts,  as  if  we  had  Moses'  wish ;  and  all  the  people  were  propheta 
—(Num.  xi,  28.) 

Dr.  Daubeney  informs  us,  that  there  was  a  seminary  in  Bath 

"  In  which  boys  are  trained  for  preaching  ;  and  at  about  twelve  or  thirteen 
years  of  age,  when  considered  qualified  for  public  exhibition,  are  sent  to 
undertake  the  services  of  religion." 

Speaking  of  the  tiny  heroes  of  the  pulpit,  Dr.  Valpy  tells  us, 
that  one  of  them, 

"  A  lad  twelve  years  old,  went  about  the  country  preaching  extempore. 
He  became  popular,  and  was  much  admired  and  patronised." 

This  accounts,  at  once,  both  for  the  multitude  of  our  preach- 
ers, and  for  the  confusion  which  they  generate  ; — preaching  is 
now  a  very  profitable^  and  a  very  lazy  trade. 

"  Each  pious  'prentice  freely  may  dispense 

Salvation  ;  licensed  now  for  eighteen  pence  : 

And  should  devotion  tempt  him  from  his  awl. 

He'll  get  his  orders,  if  he  gets  his  call." — Religio  Clerici. 

I  could  adduce  a  number  of  other  Protestant  authorities,  all 
condemning  in  the  most  positive  terms  the  disunion  which  exists 
in  the  Protestant  churches.  It  is  unanimously  admitted  by  all, 
that  they  have  no  fixed  and  common  principle  to  direct  them. 
Mr.  Pope  set  up  his  private  judgment,  and  would  have  everj? 
man  worship  it  as  an  idol.  He  contends  that  all  have  a  right  to 
exercise  their  private  judgment,  and  to  choose  what  religion  they 
please.  According  to  his  principles,  that  book  which  is  inspired 
of  God,  will  be  made  to  dictate  160  different  religions — the  spirit 
of  truth  will  be  changed  into  the  spirit  of  error.  Every  wild 
fanatic  will  appeal  to  private  interpretation,  and  internal  illumin- 
ation. The  book  of  God  will  be  produced  to  support  the  most 
abominable  blasphemies,  and  real  religion  will  be  utterly 
destroyed.  It  was  that  devastating  principle  which  superinduced 
the  ruin  of  the  Protestant  religion  in  the  Protestant  churches  of 
Germany  and  France.  It  was  by  such  a  principle  that  the 
Episcopal  church  of  Scotland  was  pulled  down  ;  and  the  same 
principle  will  effect  shortly  similar  results  in  Ireland,  in  regard 
to  the  established  church,  if  it  meet  with  the  encouragement  it 
has  hitherto  received.  I  call  upon  the  bishops  of  the  established 
church  to  step  into  the  breach,  and  to  save  their  church  from 
utter  destruction.  If  they  do  not  oppose  this  principle — if  the 
Catholics  do  not  step  forward  and  perform  their  duty  in  counter- 
acting such  a  destructive  principle,  the  bishops  and  parsons  of 
the  established  church  must  soon  give  way  to  the  low,  ignorant, 
pettifogging,  self-sufficient  preachers  of  "  the  word."  This 
language  may  appear  strange  in  my  mouth  :  but  I  should  rather 
Bce  the  Protestant  established  church  contir  lue,  than  that  it  should 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES,  293 

be  overtarned  by  such  men.  Tenets  have  been  faLely  imputed 
to  the  CathoHcs,  wliich  they  have  frequently  and  pubUcly  denied. 
Our  articles  of  faith  have  been  publicly  defined  by  the  church  ; 
and  all  persons  who  are  willing  to  inquire,  can  easily  learn  what 
those  articles  are. 

Mr.  Pope  has  ridiculed  the  honest  man,  of  whom  Bellarmine 
speaks,  and  who,  when  asked  what  was  his  belief,  replied,  that 
he  believed  what  the  church  believed.  That  is  my  doctrine — 
I  believe  what  the  church  believes,  and  the  church  believes  what 
1  believe.  I  have  been  long  looking  for  the  particular  opinions 
which  constitute  the  rule  of  faith  professed  by  my  friend — but 
he  has  abstained  from  any  thing  of  the  kind.  He  could  not 
prove,  that  any  three  books  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament  are 
absolutely  inspired,  unless,  indeed,  we  admit  the  authority  of  his 
internal  evidence.  According  to  him,  that  internal  evidence  is  a 
meridian  sun,  which  illuminates  the  sacred  volume.  If  so — it 
is  strange,  that  though  such  a  powerful  light  should  be  in  exist- 
ence, so  many  should  be  involved  in  darkness,  and  that  there 
should  have  been  millions  of  Catholics,  who,  for  1800  years, 
could  never  discover  this  light,  which,  according  to  Mr.  Pope, 
shines  forth  with  such  resplendent  lusture.  But  it  is  but  an  airy 
phantom — a  wandering  meteor  which  leads  not  to  truth,  but  to 
doubt  and  error.  It  is  the  production  of  heated  and  enthusiastic 
imaginations.  The  ancient  heretics  laid  no  claim  to  internal 
evidence — they  denied  its  existence.  They  wanted  that  borrowed 
light  which  illumines  the  Evangelizers  of  the  present  day.  If 
this  internal  evidence  be  so  plain  and  discernable,  as  Mr.  Pope 
would  have  us  believe,  why  was  it  not  claimed  by  the  ancient 
heretics — why  did  so  many  millions  remain  so  unconscious  of  its 
existence,  and  why  did  it  continue  so  long  hidden  and  obscured, 
as  it  were  by  a  cloud,  until  the  noon-day  of  evangelical  reformation 
had  arrived  ]  How  could  all  this  happen,  if  this  light  shine  forth 
directing  to  that  city,  which  is  built  upon  a  mountain,  and  which 
can  be  seen  by  all  men  ] 

Mr.  Pope. — Gentlemen,  t  have  already  referred  to  the  epistle 
to  the  Romans,  to  prove  the  distinction  between  fundamental 
and  non-fundamental  doctrines.  I  admit  the  evil  of  exalting  one 
man  above  another  by  saying'  "  I  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos," 
and  we  charge  the  church  of  Rome  with  saying,  "  I  am  of 
Cephas,''  or  Peter,  though  forbidden  by  St.  Paul. 

"  Whereas  there  is  among  you  envying  and  contention,  are  you  not  carnal 
and  walk  according  to  man  ?  For  while  one  saith,  I  indeed  am  of  Paul  j  and 
another,  I  am  of  Apollos  ;  are  you  not  men  ?  What  then  is  Apollos,  and 
what  is  Paul  ?  The  ministers  of  Him  whom  yoj  have  believed  ;  an:*  iO 
every  one  as  the  Lord  hath  given." — 1  Cor.  iii,  3,  4  5. 

25* 


294  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

In  proof  that  Paul,  as  well  as  Peter,  founded  the  church  of 
Rome,  I  referred  to  the  testimony  of  Irengeus.  Mr.  Maguire 
I  am  authorized  to  say,  has  full  permission  to  consult  the  library 
of  Trinity  college,  in  order  to  examine  my  quotations.  As  to 
the  argument  about  the  Deists,  I  appeal  to  men  of  sense,  whethe' 
that  objection  has  not  been  answered.  The  Roman  Missal  (ir 
the  Rubric  de  Defectibus,  circ.  Miss.  Occurrentibus,)  has  .- 
whole  chapter  on  the  accidents  which  may  occur  in  the  celebra 
tion  of  the  mass.  I  beg  to  call  your  most  particular  attention 
to  that  part  of  said  Rubric.  As  to  the  number  of  sects,  I  would 
observe,  that  the  Protestants  reject  many  of  them.  The  church 
of  Rome  has  done  the  same.  Why  are  not  real  Protestants,  as 
well  as  the  church  of  Rome,  entitled  to  disclaim  alliance  with 
those  who  are  in  error  1  We  have  council  against  council. 
The  council  of  Ephesus  anathematizes  any,  who  should  add  to 
the  Nicene  creed.  I  ask,  is  not  Pius  TV,  who  has  added  thereto 
so  many  articles,  distinctly  condemned,  as  well  as  all  who  make 
use  of  this  creed  ?  Yet  that  is  the  creed  adopted  by  Roman 
Catholics  at  this  day. 

The  second  council  of  Nice  assigns,  as  one  reason  for 
worshipping  the  image  of  Christ,  that  he  is  not  sensibly  present 
on  earth,  but  only  in  his  divinity. — Act.  4,  p.  305.  It  also 
anathematizes  all  who  assert  that  Christ  was  not  circumscribed 
as  to  his  human  nature.  Is  not  this  the  church  of  one  age 
against  the  church  of  another  1 

As  to  the  doctrine  of  intention,  "  saltem  faciendi  quod  facit 
ecclesia," — (Trent  Cone.  Sess.  v.  can.  11.)  I  have  heard  a 
diiference  of  opinion  expressed — (so  much  for  unity.)  At  the 
discussion  at  Carlow,  a  Roman  Catholic  priest,  under  the  juris- 
diction of  Dr.  Doyle,  asserted  that  the  doctrine  of  intention  was 
merely  a  probable  opinion  among  divines. 

The  rubric  of  the  Missal  says, 

"  If  any  priest  should  have  before  him  eleven  hosts  and  should  intend  to 
consecrate  only  ten,  not  determining  which  ten  he  intends,  in  these  cases  he 
does  not  consecrate,  because  intention  is  required.  It  is  otherwise,  if 
thinking  indeed  that  there  are  ten,  he  should  wish  however  to  consecrate  all 
the  hosts  before  him  ;  for  then  all  will  be  consecrated,  and  therefore  the  priest 
ought  always  to  have  such  intention,  namely,  of  consecrating  all  those  which 
are  placed  before  him  for  consecration." — Roman  Missal,  Dublin,  Richard 
Coyne,  1822,  Rubric  de  Defect,  p.  53. 

And  here  permit  me  to  inquire,  as  transubstantiation  depends 
on  the  intention  of  the  priest,  how  is  an  individual  to  know 
whether  the  priest  has  the  intention?  Can  he  enter  into  his 
heart  ?  In  cases  where  there  is  no  transubstantiation,  is  there 
not  direct  idolatry  in  worshipping  that  which,  by  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  church  of  Rome,  is  not  God  ?  and  how  can  any 
individual,  according  to  such  a  principle,  be  sure  that  he  is  not 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES.  295 

guilty  of  idolatry,  the  intention  of  the  priest  being  necessary  to 
transubstantiation  1  The  people,  therefore,  cannot  know,  even 
according  to  their  own  principles,  whether  they  worship  God  or 
not.  I  shall  be  told  that  it  is  not  the  fault  of  the  people,  for 
they  do  not  mean  to  worship  that  which  is  not  consecrated,  but 
to  worship  God.  So  say  idolaters — we  only  worship  God  through 
the  image.  Hence,  this  mode  of  arguing  would  justify  idolatry 
generally.  Again  ;  bear  in  mind,  that  this  doctrine  of  intention 
is  not  confined  to  the  eucharist  ;  it  runs  through  the  whole  sys- 
tem. Plow  v-loes  Mr.  Maguire  know  whether  Popes  and  Bish- 
ops, at  ordinations,  have  always  intended  to  ordain  ?  How  does 
Mr.  Maguire  know  whether  he  is  a  priest  or  not  ?  He  is  not 
certain  that  the  bishop  who  ordained  him,  intended  to  ordain  him. 
Neither  does  he  know  whether  he  is  baptized  or  not  ;  for  unless 
the  officiating  priest  had  intention,  the  outward  ceremony  failed  : 
marriage  also  according  to  the  church  of  Rome,  is  null  and  void, 
unless  intention  accompanies  the  performance  of  the  ceremony 
on  the  part  of  the  priest.  See,  then,  the  awful  results  of  this 
pernicious  doctrine  ! 

My  friend  took  hold  of  an  expression  in  an  extract  from  Theo- 
doret,  which  I  quoted  yesterday.  I  again  say,  that  his  argument 
would  fail  if  he  believed  in  transubstantiation.  The  change  in 
which  he  behoved,  was  a  moral  change.  I  admit  his  language 
is  strong.     I  shall  read  to  you  another  passage  : — 

"  Jacob,  (says  Orthodoxus,)  called  the  blood  of  the  Saviour  the  blood  of 
the  grape.  For,  if  the  Lord  be  denominated  a  vine,  and  if  the  fruit  of  the 
vine  be  called  wine,  and  if  from  the  side  of  the  Lord  fountains  of  blood 
and  water,  circulating  through  the  rest  of  his  'jody  passed  to  the  lower 
parts  ;  well  and  seasonably  did  the  patriarch  say,  He  washed  his  garments 
m  wine,  and  his  clothes  in  the  blood  of  grapes.  As  we  then  call  the  mystic 
fruit  of  the  vine  after  its  consecration,  the  blood  of  the  Lord,  so  he  called  the 
blood  of  the  true  vine,  the  blood  of  the  grape. — Our  Saviour  indeed,  changed 
the  names  ;  for  to  his  body  he  gave  the  name  of  the  symbol,  while  to  the 
symbol  he  gave  the  name  of  his  blood  ;  and,  having  called  himself  a  vine, 
he  thence  consistently  applied  the  appellation  of  his  blood  to  the  symbol. 
But  the  scope  of  such  language  is  perfectly  familiar  to  those  who  have  been 
initiated  into  the  mysteries.  For  our  Lord  required  that  they  who  partake  of 
the  divine  mysteries,  should  not  regard  the  nature  of  the  things  which  they 
see  ;  but  that  in  the  change  of  names  they  should  believe  that  change  which 
is  wrought  by  grace.  Inasmuch  as  he  who  called  his  own  natural  body 
wheat  and  bread,  and  who  further  bestowed  upon  himself  the  appellation  of 
a  vine  ;  he  also  honoured  the  visible  sympols  with  the  name  of  his  body  and 

blood,  NOT    CHANGING    THEIR  NATURE,  BUT    ADDING  GRACE    TC    NATURE."— 

Jjjj^d.  Dial,  i,  oper.  vol.  iv,  p.  17,  18. 

As  to  Pope  Gelasius,  it  does  not  much  matter  whether  the 
work  from  which  I  quoted,  was  written  by  him  or  by  Gelasius 
Cyzinicus  ;  it  proves  that  opposition  was  made  to  transubstan- 
tiation, a  doctrine  which  was  growing  at  that  time. 

The  council  of  Chalcedon  decreed,  that  equal  honour  should 


296  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OP 

be  paid  to  the  bishops  of  Rome  and  Constantinople.  On  the 
contrary,  the  Pope  is  now  call-ed  God's  supreme  vicar  With 
respect  to  general  councils,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  wr  ting  to 
Procopius,  says, 

•*  To  tell  you  plainly,  I  am  determined  to  fly  all  conventions  of  bishops. 
For  I  never  yet  saw  a  council  that  ended  happily.  Instead  of  lessening,  they 
inyariably  augment  this  evil." 

Here  is  the  opinion  of  a  man  respecting  councils,  who  had 
himself  been  present  at  the  second  general  council. 

The  Marquess  of  Pescara,  Panan,  who  was  present  at  the 
council  of  Trent,  as  the  charge  d'affairs  of  the  Spanish  ambas- 
sador, used  often  to  say,  that 

"//c  deserved  much  credit  for  being  a  Christian^  after  having  been  present  at 
tioo  elections  of  Popes,  and  at  one  council," — See  Literary  Life  of  Don  Joaquin 
Lorenzo  De  Villanueva,  2d  vol.  Append.  Lo  sucecido  en  el  councilio  de 
Trento  desde  1561  hasta  que  se  acabo,  written  by  Don  Pedro  Gonzalez  de 
INIendoza,  bishop  of  Salamanca. 

Fiom  the  testimony  of  a  Roman  Catholic,  you  may  judge  of 
the  purity  and  principles  by  which  the  Fathers  of  the  council  of 
Trent  were  actuated.  Mr.  Maguire  talks  of  infallibility  being 
calculated  to  end  divisions.  The  Inquisition  itself  cannot  sup- 
press the  inward  feelings  of  the  heart.  The  church  of  Rome 
may  succeed  in  putting  down  outward  dissensions.  But  such 
peace  is  like  that  of  the  dogs  of  Scylla,  who  howled  and  barked 
at  each  other,  and  then  retreated  into  the  unity  of  her  cavernous 
womb. 

The  church  of  Rome,  even  in  her  boasted  uniformity  of  wor- 
ship and  ordinances  is  not  agreed.  For  instance,  the  church  of 
Abyssinia  offered  about  200  years  ago,  to  adopt  the  Pope  as 
the  supreme  head  of  the  church.  On  that  occasion  the  court  of 
Rome  did  not  require  that  the  Abyssinian  ceremonies,  which  were 
quite  different  from  those  of  Rome,  should  be  changed.  The 
Pope  received  the  ambassador  from  the  emperor  of  Abyssinia  ; 
and  the  pope's  secretary  declared,  that  the  said  emperor  should 
always  be  considered  as  the  true  son  of  his  holiness.  Never- 
theless, the  Abysinians  at  that  time  were  Eutychians — they  cir- 
cumcised their  children ;  they  observed  the  Jewish  sabbath  ; 
they  communicated  under  two  kinds — they  did  not  believe  in 
ihe  absolute  necessity  of  baptism,  and  rejected  the  seven  sacra- 
ments.— "  Francis  Alvarez,  his  description  of  Ethiopia." 

The  Maronites  were  also  united  to  the  church  of  Rome, 
because  they  acknowledged  the  Pope's  supremacy ;  still  they 
retained  all  their  own  ceremonies,  which  they  performed  in  their 
&wn  language. — (See  the  observations  subjoined  by  Rich.  Simon, 
D  his  French  translation  of  the  Italian  Jesuit  Dandiai's  Voyage 
o  Mount  Libanus,  published  in  12mo.  at  Paris.  See  also  Euseb 
Renaudot,  Historia  Patriarch,  Alexand.  p.  548.) 


THE  PROTESTANY  CHURCHES.  297 

±<  urther ;  I  charge  Mr.  Maguire  himself,  with  holding  prin- 
ciples contrary  to  his  own  church.  First,  he  says,  that  Protes- 
tants are  not  heretics.  I  reply,  that  his  church  describes  all 
who  are  out  of  her  pale,  as  "infidels,  heretics,  and  excommuni- 
cated persons."  Dr.  French,  a  Roman  Catholic  bishop  of 
Ferns,  in  his  "  Doleful  Fall  of  Andrew  Sail,"  says,  that  the 
church  of  England,  both  priests  and  people,  as  well  secundum 
prcesentem  as  secundum  futuram  justitiam,  are  out  of  the  mystical 
ark  of  Christ.  Dr.  O'Reilly,  in  his  catechism,  says,  that  it  is 
necesary  for  the  soul,  on  pain  of  damnation,  to  be  obedient  to 
the  see  of  Rome.  Does  Mr.  Maguire,  by  opposing  this  doc- 
trine, exemplify  the  unity  of  the  system  1  Mr.  Maguire  has 
this  day  contradicted  the  principle  which  he  laid  down  before — 
namely,  that  it  was  sufficient  for  the  churches  in  communion  with 
Rome  to  agree  in  essentials,  though  not  in  non-essentials  :  and 
we  are  now  informed,  that  there  is  no  such  distinction.  The 
church  of  Rome  holds  that  the  scriptures  are  to  be  interpreted 
**  secundum  sensum  quem  tenet  ecclesia,  et  unanimem  consen- 
sum  patrum,"  according  to  the  opinion  of  the  church,  and  the 
unanimous  consent  of  the  Fathers,  in  matters  of  faith  and 
morals  pertaining  to  the  edification  of  Christian  doctrine  "in 
rebus  fidei  et  morum  ad  Christianse  doctrinse  jedificationewf 
pertinentibus." 

As  to  the  anathema  being  annexed  to  none  but  to  articles  c 
faith,  I  refer  to  the  4th  session  of  the  council  of  Trent : 

"  It  shall  be  lawful  for  none  to  print,  or  cause  to  be  printed,  any  books  on 
sacred  subjects,  without  the  name  of  the  author,  or  for  the  future  to  sell  them, 
or  even  to  keep  them,  except  they  be  first  examined  and  approved  of  by  the 
Ordinary,  under  pain  of  an  anathema," 

I  should  like  to  know,  was  the  matter  thus  prohibited  an  arti- 
cle of  faith  ?     Again,  in  the  27th  canon  of  the  3d  council  of  La 
teran,  it  is  said, 

"  Therefore,  we  are  resolved  to  subject  to  anathema  all  who  shall  presum* 
to  receive  or  shelter  in  their  houses  or  lands  those  who  are  called  Puritans, 
Patrins,  or  Publicans." 

I  should  like  to  know,  whether  this  injunction  related  to  a 
matter  of  faith?  My  friend,  in  the  distinction  which  he  has 
drawn,  has  contradicted  the  assembly  of  Jerusalem,  which  Mr. 
Maguire  called  the  great  exemplar  of  councils.  That  assembly 
made  no  decree  on  matters  offatth,  as  may  be  seen  by  consulting 
the  15th  of  Acts.  Mr.  Maguire  has  referred  to  some  cases  of 
fanaticism.  You  have  doubtless  heard  of  the  revelations  of 
Sister  Nativite.  I  shall  give  you  one  of  her  revelations.  A 
message  with  which,  she  said,  she  was  charged  from  heaven  to 
deliver,  \*ds,  that  her  sister  nuns  should  leave  off  wearing  linen 
chemisesi  and  w«ar  flannel  ones  again,  in  conformity  to  the 


298  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OP 

rule  of  their  order !     These  revelations  are  the  production  of 
which  Dr.  Milner  said, 

"  I  cannot  speak  too  highly  of  the  sublimity  and  affe^jtin^  piety  of  these 
revelations  in  general." — See  Revelations  de  la  ScBur  INativite.  Paris,  1817. 

This  is  the  work  of  which  an  English  Jesuit  of  our  own  day 
has  observed,  that  if  the  whole  scriptures  were  lost,  all  their 
most  valuable  moral,  doctrinal,  and  theological  science  might 
be  recovered  here,  and  with  interest !  ! 

Did  Mr.  Maguire  never  read  of  the  Feast  of  the  Ass,  that 
was  celebrated  in  several  churches  and  cathedrals  in  France,  in 
the  15th  century]  The  gross  absurdities  then  practised  would 
exceed  belief,  were  they  not  recorded  by  faithful  witnesses.  A 
young  woman  richly  dressed,  with  an  infant  in  her  arms,  was 
placed  on  an  ass,  and  led  in  great  ceremony  to  the  altar,  where 
high  mass  was  performed  ;  and  a  hymn,  replete  with  blasphemy, 
was  sung  in  his  praise  by  the  whole  congregation :  and  what  is 
still  more  remarkable  for  its  folly  and  profanation,  the  priest 
used  at  the  conclusion  of  the  ceremony,  as  a  substitution  of  the 
words  with  which  he  dismissed  the  people,  to  bray  three  times 
like  an  ass,  which  was  answered  by  three  simular  brays  by  all 
the  people.  We  have  heard  a  good  deal  about  Johanna  South- 
cote.  Did  Mr.  Maguire  never  hear  that  the  founder  of  the 
order  of  preaching  friars,  founded  also,  in  12 C6,  an  order  ot 
preaching  sisters.  There  is,  however,  this  great  distinction 
between  the  Protestants  and  the  Roman  Catholic  church, — Pro- 
testants reject  all  such  fanatics  as  Johanna  Southcote ;  the 
church  of  Rome  does  not.  Has  Mr.  Maguire  not  heard  of  St. 
Teresa  de  Jesus?  There  is  a  collection  of  sermons  written  in 
Spanish,  by  Francis  Fernando  De  Lara  y  Villamayor,  of  the 
order  of  our  Lady  of  Mount  Carmel :  and  this  book  is  approved 
of  by  the  general  of  his  order,  and  also  by  the  doctors  of  the 
university  of  Alcala,  and  by  his  bishop,  and  by  the  king  of 
Spain's  secretary ;  in  which  there  are  three  sermons  in  eulogy 
of  the  seraphic  mother  St.  Teresa.  In  one  of  the  discourses 
ihe  preacher  informs  us,  how  this  blessed  woman  became  the 
only  female  doctor  that  ever  was  in  the  Catholic  church ;  and 
in  order  that  she  might  obtain  that  honour,  and  as  the  doctors 
of  Salamanca  hesitated  about  admitting  a  female  to  the  honour 
of  the  doctorate,  he  relates  that  her  chin  was  endowed  with  a 
long  beard,  and  that  the  learned  men  of  that  university,  seeing 
this  phenomenon,  no  longer  hesitated  to  give  her  the  degree. 

"And  thus,  (says  the  preacher,)  though  by  nature  she  was  a  woman,  yet 
in  prowess  and  by  virtue  of^her  beard  she  was  a  man,  and  that  one  of  the 
most  bearded  man  that  ever  graduated  in  that  seat  of  learning." 

The  learned  preacher  then  goes  on  to  prove  from  sciipture* 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  299 

that  Solomon  had  St.  Teresa  in  his  contemplation  in  the  31st 
chapter  of  Proverbs,  "  who  can  find  a  virtuous  vi^oman." 

"  Mulierem  fortem  quis  inveniet — quien  hallara  una  muger  fuerte,  Val- 
gameDios!  tan  dificil  es  hallar  una  muger  fuerte?  Si;  que  no  es  muger 
fuerte  como  querra  de  la  que  habla  la  letra — seno  una  muger  que  siendo 
fuerte,  fuesse  santa,  y  buena,  Mulierem  bonam,  leyo  el  Caldeo — Mulierem 
omni  virtute  cumulatam,  leyeron  otras,  una  muger  con  todas  las  vertudes 
adornada — Mulierem  audacem  ad  res  genendas,  leyo  Baino  una,  muger 
audaz  para  todas  las  impresas — Mulierem  heroinam  Leyeron  otros,  una  mu- 
ger heroo  excellentessimo.  Mulierem  virilem,  leyeron  los  Setenta:  una 
muger  varon  en  lo  varonil  mulierem  masculam,  leyo  Vatablo  una  muger 
Macho  que  explica  mas  que  varon  porque  explica  hombre  mui  barbado. 
Gssa  es  la  mu^er  que  pregunta  Solomon  ?  pues  mui  bien  dice,  que  quien  la 
lallara  ?  quis  mveniet  porque  muger  y  con  tantas  prendas  es  mui  dificil  de 
encontrar,  Mulierem  fortem  quis  inveniet." 

The  preacher  then  goes  on  to  ask  in  an  animated  style, 
who  is  this  woman  that  Solomon  has  foretold  should  be  found 
in  the  church  1 

"I  will  tell  you,  (says  he,)  since  I  know  what  answer  heaven  has  given 
to  the  question  :  for  on  a  certain  day  while  the  canonization  of  the  Senora 
doctress  was  pending,  as  one  of  the  sisters  of  our  lady  of  Mount  Carmel  was 
wrapt  in  contemplation  of  all  the  praises  the  church  had  lavished  on  this  its 
glorious  saint,  and  as  she  looked  up  to  heaven  she  saw  a  piece  of  writing  fall 
from  the  skies  at  her  feet ;  and  taking  it  up,  she  read  therein,  *  Christ  has 
formed  for  himself  a  brave  woman.'  Then  the  daughter  of  our  lady  of  Mount 
Carmel  cried  out,*  O  sisters,  our  holy  mother  is  the  stout  mother  of  the  church. 
O  lady  and  doctress,  it  well  becomes  you;  our  Mount  Carmel  indeed  en- 
joys the  riches  of  possessing  a  mother  of  such  prowess — the  university  of 
Salamanca  enjoys  the  glory  of  having  you  as  a  graduated  doctress  in  its 
schools ;  our  own  Spain  rejoices  in  having  a  Spanish  woman  such  a  Spanish 
man  in  prowess ;  and  the  whole  church  glories  in  having  a  woman  with  a 
beard. — Mulierem  Virilem,  Mulierem  Masculam.' " 

You  shall  now  have  a  specimen  of  the  divinity  of  St.  Anthony. 
On  the  text  Matt,  xi,  "  Take  my  yoke  upon  you,  &c,"  he 
begins  his  sermon  with  this  question — "What!  are  the  Apos- 
tles then  oxen  ?"  And  the  most  of  his  discourse  is  to  show, 
that  the  Apostles  were  oxen  ;  for  seven  reasons,  some  of  which 
are  these, — 

"  Because  the  Apostles  were  sent  by  pairs,  like  oxen.  Acts  13,  *  Sep- 
arate to  me  Saul  and  Barnabas,'  &c.  2.  Because  an  ox  is  a  strong  and 
laborious  animal ;  so  St.  Paul  says,  *  He  laboured  more  abundantly  than 
they  all.'  3.  An  ox  spends  little,  though  it  labours  much ;  and  one  of  the 
Apostles  says,  I  Tim.  6,  'Having  food  and  raiment,  let  us  therewith  be  con- 
tent:' but  some  prelates  m  our  time  are  palfreys,  that  spend  much,  and  labour 
little.  4.  Because  an  ox  has  two  horns ;  and  that  which  answers  in  the 
Apostles  to  these  two  horns,  is  doctrine  and  life.  Hence  that  preacher  is 
an  unicorn,  who  has  but  one  of  these ;  with  this  horn  preachers  ought  to 
blow,  that  is,  with  good  doctrine  in  preaching ;  which  yet  often  profits  little, 
unless  it  be  accompanied  with  the  other  horn,  that  is,  good  life.  Another 
reason  is,  because  there  is  nothing  in  an  ox  unprofitable;  so  neither  in  the 
life  of  the  Apostles.— Of  the  hide  of  the  one,  shoes  are  made,  and  from  the 
conversation  of  the  Apostles,  an  example  is  taken,  which  fortifies  the  affec- 
tions, as  a  shoe  does  the  feet :  Cant.  7,  *  How  beautiful  are  thy  goings  in 
wioe^.' "— Ccrni.  ^.  de  A  post  p.  428 


300  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

In  the  concluding  passage  are  expressions,  which  I  canno* 
read. 

My  friend  knows  something  of  the  Breviary  of  his  church. 
It  contains  some  most  extravagant  narratives,  For  instance, 
we  read  of  St.  Cecilia,  a  martyr,  that  when  the  axe  was  em- 
ployed, the  executioner  in  vain  endeavoured  to  sever  the  deli- 
cate neck  of  his  victim  ;  which,  being  but  half  divided,  allowed 
her  to  live  for  three  days,  at  the  end  of  which  she  died ! 

Again — His  holiness  travelling  to  Corinth,  and  being  in  want 
of  a  safe  horse,  borrowed  one  which  the  lady  of  a  certain  noble- 
man used  to  ride.  The  animal  carried  the  Pope  with  the  great- 
est gentleness,  and  when  the  journey  was  finished,  was  sent 
back  to  his  mistress  :  but  in  vain  did  the  lady  attempt  to  enjoy 
the  wonted  services  of  her  favourite  steed.  The  horse  had 
become  unmanageable,  and  gave  the  lady  many  an  indecorous 
fall,  "  as  if  (says  the  Breviary,)  feeling  indignant  at  having  to 
carry  a  woman,  since  the  vicar  of  Christ  had  been  on  his  back." 
The  horse  was  in  consequence  presented  to  the  Pope,  worthy 
only  of  such  a  rider.     Brev.  Rom.  die  27  Maii. 

This,  gentlemen,  is  the  Breviary  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
church,  compiled  in  obedience  to  a  decree  of  the  council  of 
Trent.  Pope  Pius  V,  having  ordered  a  number  of  learned  and 
able  men  to  prepare  it,  sanctioned  it  by  his  bull  quod  a  nobis, 
July  1566,  and  commanded  the  clergy  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
church  all  over  the  world  to  make  use  of  it.  I  could  also  read 
an  account  of  a  strange  composition,  called  the  Eternal  Gospel, 
**  EvangeHum  iEternum  ;"  but  time  does  not  permit. 

In  the  conclusion  of  this  important  discussion,  I  beg  to  remind 
my  friend  about  the  passage  from  Sir  Edwin  Sandys,  and  the 
application  of  the  term  tegevg  in  the  New  Testament.  A  gen- 
ileman  seemed  to  insinuate,  that  I  received  assistance  in  this 
meeting — I  can  truly  deny  the  charge.  Can  I  say  the  same  for 
my  opponent  1  He  on  the  first  day  was  not  able  to  take  notes, 
but  notes  were  taken  for  him.  Hear  me,  gentlemen ;  I  hold  in 
my  hand  the  document.     Thereon  is  written, 

7th.  As  to  the  the  Editions  of  the  Scriptures.  What  Bible  am  I  to  take 
as  authentic  ? 

Obs. — How  this  acts  powerfully  in  proof  of  the  necessity  of  a  lining  ex- 
positor to  check  all  typographical  errors  as  well  as  others. 

9th.  As  to  the  Salt  of  the  earth — denies  the  chemistry — immaterial. 

10th.  The  Lord  is  the  one  shepherd. 

Obs. — On  this  what  a  disjointed  fold — and — Obs. — The  phrase  is,  One 
fold,  and  one  Shepherd. 

"  Litera  Scripta  manet."  When  I  was  going  away,  I  hap- 
pened to  find  this  document  left  on  the  table,  and  put  it  amongst 
my  papers,  and  afterwards  discovered  that  it  contained  the  hinta 
which  I  have  noticed.     Will  my  opponent  say,  that  he  has  re 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.         801 

ceived  no  assistance  in  this  very  room,  when  a  gentleman,  who 
shall  be  here  nameless,  furnished  such  suggestions  to  him.  His 
remark  about  the  salt  was,  perhaps,  the  strongest  point  which  he 
made,  and  this  presents  itself  in  the  notes  before  us. 

He  says  he  quoted  a  passage,  by  which  my  ignorance  of 
scripture  was  exposed.  Pardon  me  for  here  remarking  that  I 
nave  read  at  least  the  Douay  Testament  with  some  attention, 
for  the  purpose  of  making  a  comparison  between  it  and  the 
authorized  version.  The  passage  to  which  Mr.  Maguire  has 
•  refered  is — 

"No  man  knoweth  whether  he  be  worthy  of  love  or  hatred."  Eoclesi- 
astes,  ix,  1. 

The  Protestant  version  reads, 

"  No  man  knoweth  either  hate  or  love." 

I  asK  any  man  to  compare  this  Douay  translation  with  the 
Protestant  version,  and  he  will  discover  the  difference  to  be  so 
great,  as  considerably  to  change  the  sense.  Let  both  be  com- 
pared with  the  original,  and  I  will  venture  to  say  that  the  Pro- 
testant version  is  correct. 

Mr.  Maguire  called  upon  Mr.  Pope  to  read  the  rest  of  the 
passage. 

Mr.  Pope  observed,  I  cannot  occupy  my  time  in  doing  so. 

We  are  drawing  to  the  termination  of  the  discussion.  T  have 
brought  forward  fair  and  undeniable  facts,  showing  that  the 
church  of  Rome  is  often  opposed  to  the  church  of  Rome,  doctor 
against  doctor,  Pope  against  Pope,  in  proof  that  the  unity,  boas- 
ted of,  does  not  exist,  and  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  not  infal- 
ible.  If,  as  I  have  proved,  the  church  of  Rome  contradicts 
herself,  inasmuch  as  two  contradictions  cannot  be  true — the 
church  of  Rome  cannot  be  infalUble.  Her  infallibility  there- 
fore goes  to  the  ground,  and  all  the  superstructure  raised  upon 
it.  Nor  is  this  all.  This  pretension  to  infallibility  is  the  mill- 
stone about  her  neck,  which,  though,  "  she  sit  as  a  queen  upon 
the  waters,"  will  sink  her  into  the  abyss.  Her  doctrine  must 
be  brought  to  the  test  of  revelation,  and  the  right  of  private 
judgment  must  be  recognized.  My  friend  has  himself  departed 
from  the  system  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and  has  brought  her 
principles  to  the  bar  of  private  judgment,  and  thereby  given  a 
practical  proof  of  the  unity  which  exists  in  the  church  of  Rome. 

I  received  yesterday  evening  a  letter  from  the  Rev.  Prince 
Crawford,  Curate  of  St.  Mary's,  Donnybrook  ;  permit  me  to 
read  it : 

"Dear  Sir.— Having  read  in  the  public  papers  a  report  of  the  controversy 
at  present  pending  between  you  and  Mr  M  aguire,  in  which  he  in  a  most 

26 


302  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OF 

decided  mtnner  denies  that  he  uttered  any  thing  at  the  Carrick  meeting 
which  could  be  considered  as  a  challenge,  I  beg  to  stale  that  through  acci- 
dental circumstances  I  met  the  gentleman  who  reported  the  proceedings  of 
that  meeting,  that  he  expressed  considerable  surprise  at  IVlr.  Maguire's  denial, 
and  in  the  most  unequivocal  manner,  declared,  that  after  the  meeting  wag 
over,  he  (the  reporter)  retired  to  the  hotel,  for  the  purpose  of  arranging  his 
notes ;  that  while  so  engaged,  Mr.  Maguire  entered  the  room,  when  the 
reporter  observed  to  him,  that  he  had  now  brought  Mr.  Pope  on  his  back,  as 
he  had  given  a  direct  challenge  to  him,  and  that  a  meeting  was  unavoidable. 
That  then  the  reporter  read  his  notes  as  they  have  appeared  in  print,  when 
Mr.  Maguire  acknowledged  them  to  be  a  faithful  statement  of  his  words,  and 
added  that  what  he  had  said  he  would  stand  to,  and  that  though  all  the  sons 
of  Adam  were  congregateii  against  him,  he  would  not  fear  them.  The  re- 
porter's name  is -.     And  as  I  am  an  advocate  for  truth,  you  have  every 

permission  to  use  this  document  as  you  may  think  proper. 

I  remain,  dear  Sir,  your's  very  faithfully 
•*  Privce  Crawford,  Curate  of  St  Mary's  Donnybrook." 

My  correspondent  mentions  the  name  of  the  reporter.  I  feel 
it  unnecessary  to  give  it  on  this  public  occasion.  My  friends, 
you  can  determine  whether  a  system,  which  has  recourse  to  such 
expedients  to  support  itself,  can  be  from  God.  And  here  I  beg 
leave  to  notice  an  assertion  of  Mr.  Eneas  McDonnell,  made  to 
two  gentlemen,  whose  names  can  be  given — "that  at  Ballinas- 
loe,  after  a  policeman  had  run  his  bayonet  into  M'DonnelPs  leg, 
I  cheered  him  to  go  on."  The  whole  is  false.  I  did  not  stir 
from  my  place,  and  would  willingly  have  prevented,  as  far  as 
my  ability  might  have  enabled  me,  the  police  from  doing  an 
injury  to  any  Roman  Catholic,  if  such  had  been  intended.  In 
reference  to  Cavan,  you  have  read  in  the  public  prints  the 
various  contradictions  of  statements  put  forward  by  ecclesiastics 
of  the  church  of  Rome.  Now  I  ask  you  as  honest  men,  can 
that  system  have  proceeded  from  the  God  of  truth,  which  has 
recourse  to  such  manoeuvring,  and  adopts  principles  of  action 
so  contradictory  to  the  tenor  of  the  holy  writ  1 

Mr.  Maguire. — I  imagined  after  Mr.  Pope  had  apologized 
for  the  intolerable  language  which  he  made  use  of  yesterday — I 
thought  that  after  apologizing  in  the  presence  of  that  God  whose 
name  he  so  often  invokes,  he  would  not  have  indulged  in  similar 
irascibility,  and  that  we  should  not  have  had  from  him  another 
display  of  the  spleen.  I  appeal  to  the  meeting,  to  say  whether 
I  have  not  conducted  myself  with  good  temper  towards  Mr. 
Pope  during  this  discussion — I  appeal  to  the  meeting,  if  I  have 
betrayed  the  same  irascibility  towards  him.  Mr.  Pope  brought 
forward  a  document  to  prove  that  I  had  received  assistance 
durir>g  this  discussion,  and  that  suggestions  were  handed  to  me 
by  a  gentleman  ^\hom  it  was  unnecessary  for  him  to  name.  A 
single  observation  will  set  you  right  on  the  subject.  I  neglected 
f^  the  first  day  of  this  discussion  to  take  notes-  I  thought  my 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  303 

memory  would  preserve  the  heads  of  the  arguments  advanced. 
Some  notes  were  taken  for  me  by  Mr.  O'Connell — but  I  declare 
solemnly  that  I  never  saw  a  line  or  syllable  of  the  document 
now  produced  by  Mr.  Pope.  I  never  got  a  hint  about  the 
argument  on  the  salt  of  the  earth.  Though  I  do  not  imagine 
myself  a  great  scholar,  I  do  not  think  there  are  many  at  this 
meeting  who  knew  more  of  that  particular  point  than  I  did 
myself.  Mr.  Pope  has  acknowledged  that  it  was  one  of  the 
best  hits  which  I  made  against  him.  It  was  he  himself  who 
introduced  the  subject.  I  am  sorry  that  Mr.  Pope  will  not  allow 
this  meeting  to  pass  over  with  the  regularity  which  distinguished 
it  from  the  commencement,  but  that  a  drop  of  the  poisoned 
chalice  must  be  infused  into  our  good  humour.  With  regard 
to  the  reporter  of  the  meeting  at  Carrick-on-Shannon,  I  repeat 
what  I  have  already  publicly  stated  in  the  newspapers,  and  I  am 
satisfied  to  abide  the  result,  that  I  never  authorized  the  report  in 
question,  and  that  I  had  no  communication  with  the  person  who 
reported  the  proceedings  of  that  meeting.  I  knew  when  I  made 
this  statement  at  the  commencement  of  this  discussion,  that 
there  were  many  persons  in  Carrick-on-Shannon,  who  would  be 
glad  to  detect  me  in  stating  what  was  not  the  fact.  I  now 
appeal,  with  confidence,  to  the  Protestants  who  were  present  at 
the  meeting  in  Carrick-on-Shannon,  whether  my  statement  be 
not  correct.  The  fact  is,  that  save  during  that  meeting,  I  have 
never  seen  the  reporter,  except  when  coming  to  Dublin  on  the 
outside  of  the  Longford  coach.  And  I  here  declare  that,  in  the 
presence  of  four  Protestants  the  challenge  of  Mr.  Pope  was  put 
into  my  hands.  I  now  return  to  the  subject  of  our  discussion  ; 
1  repeatedly  called  upon  Mr.  Pope  to  show  from  scripture  a 
distinction  between  essentials  and  non-essentials.  I  have  already 
proved  to  you,  that  in  the  passage  quoted  from  St.  Paul,  there 
was  no  difference  made  between  doctrine  and  discipline,  but 
that  the  disputes  amongst  the  people  relative  to  the  superiority 
of  their  preachers,  formed  a  breach  of  charity  which  the  Apostle 
would  not  tolerate.  Mr.  Pope  says  that  Peter  denied  Christ, 
and  upon  this  fact  he  argues  tL  d  Peter  could  not  be  infallible  ; 
but  he  makes  no  distinction  between  the  commission  of  sin,  and 
a  breach  of  divine  faith.     Christ  says  to  Peter — 

"  Simon,  Simon,  behold  Satan  hath  desired  to  have  you,  that  he  may  sift 
you  as  wheat.  But  1  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not ;  and  thou 
being  once  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren." 

That  is  when  converted  from  the  sin  which  he  had  committed, 
he  was  to  confirm  his  brethren.  Here  our  Saviour  tells  us  that 
the  faith  of  Peter  should  not  fail.  Now,  either  Peter's  faith 
failed,  or  it  did  not — if  it  failed,  we  must  suppose  that  the  prayer 
of  our  Saviour  to  his  heavenly  Father  was  inefficacious.     My 


304  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    OP 

friend  has  reminded  me  of  Theodoret.  I  re-assert,  that  in  the 
quotation*  read  by  Mr.  Pope  from  Theodoret,  the  word  '*  vene- 
rate" is  substituted  for  the  word  "  adore" — what  is  the  fact  1 
Theodoret  wrote  four  books  against  the  Eutychians,  who  denied  • 
the  reaUty  of  the  human  nature  in  Christ,  in  which  he  introduces 
two  persons  under  the  names  of  Orthodoxus  and  Erranistes, 
who  mutually  discuss  the  subject — the  first  is  the  Catholic 
believer — the  second  the  Eutychian  advocate.  In  the  first 
dialogue  the  reality  of  Christ's  presence  in  the  Eucharist,  other- 
wise the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  had  been  estabhshed ; 
but  in  the  second  the  subject  is  resumed,  and  the  change  of  the 
bread  and  wine  distinctly  pointed  out — the  first  question  is  put 
by  Orthodoxus.     He  asks  Erranistes  : — 

Orthodox. — "  Tell  me  now ;  the  mystical  symbols  which  are  offered  to 
God  by  the  priests  of  what  are  they  the  symbols  ?" 

Erranistes. — "Of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord." 

Or.—"  Of  his  true  body  or  not?" 

Err.— "Of  his  true  body." 

Or. — "  Very  well ;  for  every  image  must  have  its  original." 

Err. — *'  I  am  happy  you  have  mentioned  the  divine  mysteries :  tell  me, 
therefore,  what  you  do  call  the  gift  that  is  offered  before  the  Priest's  invo- 
cation ?" 

Or. — "  This  must  not  be  said  openly,  for  some  may  be  present  who  are  not 
initiated." 

Err. — "  Answer  then  in  hidden  terms." 

Or. — "  We  call  it  an  aliment  of  certain  grains." 

Err. — "  And  how  do  you  call  the  other  symbols  ?" 

Or. — "  We  give  it  a  name  that  denotes  a  certain  beverage." 

Err. — "And  after  the  consecration  what  are  they  called ?" 

Or.—"  The  body  of  Christ,  and  the  blood  of  Christ." 

Err. — "  fiera  6eye  rov  aytaofiov. 

Or. — "  (rco/*a  •)(^piaTov^  xai  aifia  ^piarov. 

Err. — "  And  you  believe  that  you  partake  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  !^* 

Or.—"  So  I  believe." 

Err. — "  As  the  symbols  then  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  were  different 
before  the  consecration  of  the  Priest,  and  after  that  consecration  are  changed, 
in  the  same  manner  we  (Eutychians)  say  the  body  of  Christ  after  his  ascen- 
sion was  changed  into  the  divine  essence." 

Or. — "  Thou  art  taken  in  thine  own  net ;  for  afl;er  the  consecration  tht 
mystical  symbols  lose  not  their  proper  nature ;  they  remain  in  the  former 
substance,  figure,  and  appearance,  (or  as  some  translate  it,  in  the  shape  and 
form  of  the  former  substance,)  to  be  sejn  and  understood  to  be  what  they 
have  been  made ;  this  they  are  believed  to  be ;  and  as  such  they  are  adored." 

Thus  Theodoret  turned  the  comparison  of  Eutyches  (who  be- 
lieved in  transubstantiation)  against  himself— viz ;  that  as  the 
elements  of  bread  and  wine  remained  after  consecration  so  as 
to  be  seen  and  felt — that  is,  as  far  as  the  senses  were  con- 
cerned ;  so  Christ's  humanity  did  remain  after  its  hypostatical 
union  with  his  divinity. 

*  Mr.  Pope  begs  to  say,  with  Mr.  Maguire's  concurrence,  that  he  gave  the  passagi 
from  Theodoret,  as  he  found  it  translated  in  Faber's  ♦  Difficulties  of  Romanism."- 
Lond.  18S0,  p.  141. 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  S05 

With  resjiecl  to  the  council  of  Ephesus  having  decreed,  that 
nothing  should  be  added  to  what  had  been  determined  upon  by 
the  council  of  Nice,  I  agree  that  it  did  so.  But  will  it  be  said, 
that  when  other  articles,  besides  those  noticed  in  the  council  of 
Nice,  happened  to  be  denied  by  heretics,  that  such  articles 
should  not  be  determined  and  explained  by  other  and  succeed- 
ing councils]  According  to  the  same  line  of  argument,  as  the 
^ord  consubstantial  was  not  mentioned  at  the  council  of  Jeru- 
salem, the  Arians  might  have  argued,  that  it  should  not  be 
'ntroduced  at  the  council  of  Nice.  The  council  of  Ephesus 
only  meant  that  nothing  was  to  be  added  to  what  had  been  com- 
manded by  our  Saviour,  and  handed  down  to  us  by  the  Apostles. 
Mr.  Pope  says,  it  would  be  direct  idolatry  in  the  Catholics  to 
adore  the  host,  as  it  may  happen  not  to  be  consecrated.  I  will 
read  to  you  the  opinion  of  no  less  a  man  than  the  celebrated 
Protestant  divine.  Dr.  Thorndyke,  on  the  subject : 

"  Will  any  Papist  acknowledge  that  he  honours  the  elements  of  the  Eu- 
charist for  God  ?     Will  common  sense  charge  him  with  honouring  that  in 

the  sacrament  which  he  does  not  believe  to  be  there  ? Those  who  say 

that  Papists,  by  worshipping  the  host,  are  guilty  of  idolatry,  only  lead  Pro- 
testants by  the  nosf?. 

But  when  the  ancient  idolaters  prayed  to  Baal  and  their  idols, 
{simulacra^  dumb  things,  as  they  are  called  in  holy  writ)  prove 
to  me  that  they  only  intended  to  worship  God,  and  not  the  idols 
themselves,  when  they  offered  up  adoration  to  them,  and  I  shal 
give  up  the  argument.  Let  Mr.  Pope  show,  if  he  can,  by  propei 
documents,  that  I  have  contradicted  Catholic  doctrine,  and  let 
him  not  stand  up  here  to  attack  that  which  he  does  not  under- 
stand. I  could  quote  thirty  Protestant  writers  to  disprove  the 
charge  of  idolatry  against  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  showing, 
that  even  if  the  elements  of  the  sacrament  do  not  undergo  a 
transubstantiation.  Catholics  are  not  guilty  of  idolatry,  as  their 
worship  is  directed  to  Christ,  into  whose  body  and  blood  they 
believe  the  elements  have  been  transubstantiated.  I  have  here 
the  dialogue  of  Theodoret,  and  I  shall  repeat  his  words — 

Orthodox. — "  Tell  me  of  what  are  the  mystical  symbols  offered  to  God 
by  the  Priest?" 
Erranistes. — "  Of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord." 
Or.—"  Of  his  true  body  or  not  ?" 
Err.— «  Of  his  true  body." 

Or. — "  Very  well ;  for  every  image  must  have  its  original." 
Err. — "  And  after  the  consecration  what  are  they  called  ?" 
Or.—"  The  body  of  Christ,  and  the  blood  of  Christ" 

Again,  he  asserts  that  I  said,  that  the  Catholics  are  agreed 
only  in  essentials,  and  that  I  confined  my  statement  to  that.  I 
deny  the  assertion — I  publicly  said,  that  even  in  discipline  they 
are  not  allowed  to  disagree,  for  the  smaller  the  cause  of  dispute 
the  greater  would  be  the  scandal,  because  the  less  justifiable. 

26* 


306  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY    CF 

Mr.  Pope  hay  quoted  Dr.  Milner.  When  he  can  produce  a 
passage  from  the  great  Dr.  Milner  opposed  to  any  point  of 
CathoUc  doctrine,  he  will  be  an  extraordinary  man  indeed.  He 
also  gave  us  a  quotation  from  a  second  Blanco  White.  I  appeal 
to  this  meeting  whether  it  be  fair  to  produce  those  men  as  wit- 
nesses against  the  Catholic  church,  who  have  apostatized  from 
her  communion,  and  who,  in  order  to  justify  their  apostasy, 
endeavour  to  blacken  the  church  which  they  have  deserted,  in 
every  possible  way — men  who  endeavour  to  exhibit  her  as  the 
scarlet  lady  of  the  seven  hills,  and  her  visible  head  as  anti-christ? 
By-the-bye,  the  latter  elegant  phrases  are  not  so  much  in  vogue 
at  the  present  day,  nor  so  frequently  employed  against  the 
Catholic  church  as  they  were  in  the  days  of  the  reformers.  It 
is  wonderful  to  see  how  people  will  retrace  their  steps.  In  the 
early  English  Protestant  translations  of  the  Bible,  congregation 
was  used  for  the  word  church,  and  elder  for  bishop.  But  when 
the  Protestants  got  possession  of  the  tithes  and  green  acres, 
church  and  bishop  were  restored  in  the  Bible.  Is  it  not  very 
foolish,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  for  Mr.  Pope  to  go  over  all  the 
antiquated  stories  which  he  is  enabled  to  collect  from  the 
pamphlets  of  such  men  as  Gideon  Ousley,  and  to  bring  forward 
such  new-lights  as  authopities  against  the  Catholic  church  1  I 
could  have  quoted  a  passage  from  the  Rev.  Sydney  Smith, 
worth  all  the  arguments  which  he  could  produce,  relative  to  the 
persecutions  which  the  Catholics  suffered  from  the  early  re- 
formers ;  but  I  have  not,  throughout  this  discussion,  made  any 
appeal  to  the  feelings  of  my  Catholic  auditors,  and  I  shall  not 
do  so  now. 

Mr.  Pope  talked  of  St.  Teresa,  and  related  some  wonderful 
stories  about  her  long  beard.  I  suppose  he  would  have  us  con- 
clude, that  because  St.  Teresa  was  long  bearded,  the  Catholic 
rehgion  cannot  be  true.  I  deny  the  authority  which  he  has 
quoted.  I  refer  him  to  the  hfe  of  St.  Teresa,  as  given  in  the 
Lives  of  the  Saints,  by  Alban  Butler — he  will  not  find  recorded 
there  the  ridiculous  stories  which  he  has  retailed  to  us.  He 
acknowledges  that  he  did  not  know  that  there  was  such  a  text 
in  the  Douay  Bible  as  **  No  man  knoweth  whether  he  be  worthy 
of  love  or  hatred."  Did  he  not  tell  us  that  he  had  carefully 
compared  the  two  translations,  and  did  he  not  describe  the  Vul- 
gate as  scaturientem  erroribus  ? 

He  now  acknowledges  his  ignorance  of  the  existence  of  this 
text  in  the  Douay  Bible.  Now  the  version  given  of  this  text  in 
the  Douay  Bible  differs  not  materially  nor  substantially  from  that 
given  of  It  in  the  Protestant  translation.     It  is  there  rendered, 

"Man  knoweth  not  love  or  hatred  by  all  that  is  before  him." 


THE    PROTESTANT    CHURCHES.  307 

Hear  the  next  verse — 

"  But  all  things  are  kept  uncertain  for  the  time  to  coJne,  because  all  things 
equally  happen  to  the  just  and  to  the  wicked,  to  the  good  and  to  the  evil,  to 
the  clean  and  to  the  unclean,"  &c. 

There  is  I  contend  in  these  passages,  no  material  differences 
between  the  Protestant  version  and  the  Douay  Bible.  Mr.  Pope 
has  showed  his  ignorance  of  the  solemn  expression  always  used 
by  a  general  council  in  defining  articles  of  faith,  and  he  con- 
founds with  it  the  formula  of  an  excommunication.  When  an 
article  of  faith  is  declared  by  a  general  council,  it  is  solemnly 
decreed,  "  Si  quis  dixerit ;  if  any  one  shall  contradict  this 
anathema  sit."  But  where  that  formulary  is  not  employed,  and 
the  mere  excommunication  pronounced,  it  does  not  regard  mat- 
ters of  faith.  Had  Mr.  Pope  consulted  Delahogue,  with  whose 
work  he  pretends  to  be  so  intimately  acquainted,  he  would  find 
the  phrase,  si  quis  dixerit^  is  never  employed  by  a  general 
council,  but  when  an  article  of  faith  is  defined.  I  should  be 
sorry  that  any  personal  differences  should  exist  between  me  and 
my  friend,  Mr.  Pope.  I  declare  that  I  have  no  feelings  towards 
him,  but  those  of  a  Christian,  a  brother,  and  a  gentleman  ;  and 
that  I  shall  never  hear  him  spoken  of  disrespectfully  without 
defending  his  character.  I  trust  that  I  shall  never  entertain  any 
other  towards  liim.  I  will  say,  and  it  is  as  far  as  I  can  go,  that 
no  man  ever  maintained  his  opinions  more  ingeniously,  or  set 
up  a  more  plausible  defence.  It  was  to  me  a  cause  of  regret 
that  the  interrogatory  system  had  not  been  adopted  in  this  dis- 
cussion, as  I  would  then  have  ha^  an  opportunity  of  taking  Mr. 
Pope's  arguments  seriatim,  point  by  point,  and  of  unravelling 
his  sophisms.  Mr.  Pope  talked  of  the  Catholic  church  having 
fallen  into  error,  and  yet  he  admits  that  this  erroneous  church 
has  been  suffered  to  exist  for  eighteen  hundred  years.  This 
gentleman  really  appears  to  have  acquired  more  confidence 
after  his  six  or  seven  years  preaching,  than  the  whole  Catholic 
church  for  eighteen  hundred  years.  It  has  long  been  the  cus- 
tom of  the  reformers,  and  of  those  who  were  gifted  with  internal 
illumination,  to  talk  of  the  scarlet  lady,  seated  upon  the  seven 
bills.  How  could  a  church  have  thus  subsisted  for  eighteen 
centuries,  if  error  had  formed  its  corner  stone  and  foundation  ? 
Have  we  ever  read  or  heard  of  any  system  either  in  politics,  or 
in  religion,  lasting  for  such  a  period  of  time,  unless  it  was 
founded  upon  the  best  principles  1 

I  may  now  mention  that  I  put  seven  queries  to  Mr.  Pope  to 
any  one  of  which  he  has  not  returned  even  the  semblance  of  an 
answer.  I  asked  him  why  he  believed  that  all  truths  are  con- 
tained in  the  scripture  ;  I  then  inquired  from  him  by  wha* 
authority  the  sign  of  the  cross  was  employed  in  baptism  1     I 


308  THE    WANT    OF    UNITY  OP 

asked  him  why  he  used  blood — though,  indeed,  he  had  endea- 
voured to  draw  a  distinction  between  the  red  gravy  which  flows 
from  a  shoulder  of  mutton,  and  the  blood — (of  the  particles  of 
which  that  gravy  is  most  unquestionably  composed.)  I  confess 
myself  unable  to  understand  his  metaphysical  distinction.  Per- 
haps he  goes  upon  the  maxim  that  odia  sunt  restringenda,  1 
called  upon  him  to  show  why  he  did  not  wash  the  feet  of  his 
neighbours  ;  Peter,  we  know,  said  to  Christ :  "  Lord,  thou  shalt 
not  wash  my  feet" — our  Saviour  replied  :  "  If  I  wash  thee  not, 
thou  shalt  have  no  part  with  me."  I  called  upon  Mr.  Pope  to 
prove  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  from  the  scripture  ?  I 
called  upon  him  to  show  where  the  term  "  consuhstantiaV^  was 
employed  in  scripture  1  I  called  upon  him  to  show  where  the 
baptism  of  infants  was  authorized  by  scripture.  I  demanded  an 
answer  to  these  several  queries.  He  has  certainly  evaded  them. 
Judge,  candid  and  enlightened  Protestants,  if  he  has  quoted  as 
many  texts  of  scripture  as  I  have.  There  is  not  an  article  of 
my  belief  in  support  of  which  I  did  not  adduce  clear  and  most 
manifest  texts  of  scripture.  Has  Mr.  Pope  done  so  '?  He  has 
quoted  some  texts  of  scripture  against  me,  but  not  one  to  esta- 
blish his  own  rule  of  faith.  He  thought  proper  to  substitute  for 
the  word  of  God,  the  faUible  interpretation  of  man — to  appeal 
from  the  direct  evidence  of  scripture,  to  the  obscure  and  glim- 
mering light  of  private  judgment.  Beware  of  following  such  an 
ignis  fatuus^  when  the  meridian  sun  is  before  you — it  will  lead 
you  into  marshes  and  the  habitations  of  error — it  will  never 
conduct  you  to  the  fountain  of  truth.  I  have  quoted  the  opin- 
ions of  the  holy  Fathers,  and  I  am  bold  to  say,  that  I  prefer  their 
opinions  to  the  single  opinion  of  Mr.  Pope.  I  have  read  to  you 
the  opinion  of  St.  Augustin,  who  declares  that  he  "  would  not 
believe  the  four  gospels  if  the  authority  of  the  Catholic  church 
did  not  move  him  thereto.  This  recalls  to  my  mind  the  saying 
of  St.  Cyprian,  that  he  has  not  God  for  his  Father  who  has  not 
the  Church  for  his  mother.  This  Mr.  Pope  asserts  was  applied 
to  Pope  Stephen.  The  work  of  Cyprian  lies  here  on  the  table, 
and  I  challenge  Mr.  Pope  to  read  twenty  lines  of  the  page  in 
which  this  passage  occurs,  and  then  to  maintain  nis  opinion  as 
before.  The  passage  of  St.  Cyprian  has  been  misrepresented 
by  my  friend.  Again,  I  called  upon  him  to  answer  the  objections 
of  the  Socinian,  without  manifestly  contradicting  the  principles 
of  private  judgment.  Reason  is  on  the  side  of  the  Socinian ; 
and  mysteries  being  above  reason^  he  has  a  better  right  to  exer- 
cise his  private  judgment  than  Mr.  Pope,  of  which  be  it  observed, 
Mr.  Pope  cannot  claim  a  monopoly.  I  would  answer  the  Soci- 
nian by  the  authority  of  a  church  which  has  existed  for  eighteen 
Jndred  years.     If  he  would  not  beheve  in  that  authority,  I,  at 


THE  PROTESTANT  CHURCHES.  809 

all  events,  would  not  contradict  myself,  as  I  would  not  concede 
to  h*.m  the  right  of  private  judgment.  Not  so  Mr.  Pope.  The 
very  fact  of  his  pressmg  his  interpretation  upon  the  Socinian 
contradicts  the  principles  of  private  judgment,  as  he  thus  endea- 
vours to  make  a  monopoly  of  that  which  he  himself  describes  as 
the  gift  of  heaven. 

I  defied  Mr.  Pope  to  show  how  a  Protestant  according  to  his 
principles  could  make  an  act  of  faith.  He  has  not  done  so.  I 
admit  the  exercise  of  private  judgment  in  discovering  the  marks 
of  the  true  church,  but  the  moment  the  inquirer  has  made  that 
discovery,  that  instant  all  difficulties  are  cleared  away — all 
objections  vanish — and  he  is  enabled  to  laugh  to  scorn  tlie 
quibbles  of  the  Atheist,  the  Deist,  and  the  unbeliever.  Talk 
of  internal  evidence,  indeed — why  you  might  as  well  tell  the 
Pagan  that  2  and  2  make  6 — he  can  never  make  the  discovery. 
I  never  could  make  the  discovery.  Millions  upon  millions  of 
Christians  have  lived  and  died  without  ever  discovering  this 
internal  illumination  of  which  Mr.  Pope  has  so  confidently 
spoken.  The  Catholic  church  rejects  this  ignus  fatuus,  and 
with  equal  justice  and  wisdom  she  discards  and  condemns  the 
principle  of  private  judgment.  According  to  that  principle,  as 
1  have  already  shown,  it  would  be  impossible  to  establish  by 
clear  and  unexceptionable  argument,  the  authority,  the  integrity^ 
and  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  scriptures. 


Here  the  Discussion  ended.  When  Mr.  Maguire  had  taken  his  seat  Mr. 
Pope  rose  and  shook  him  by  the  hand,  which  was  cordially  returned  by  Mr. 
Maguire. 

Mr.  Pope  then  stated  to  the  meeting,  that  he  had  that  moment  been  in- 
formed by  Admiral  Oliver  that  the  notes  and  suggestions  of  which  he,  Mr. 
Pope,  had  spoken,  though  taken  down,  had  not  been  seen  by  Mr.  Maguire. 


Counsellor  Clinch  declined  to  give  an  opinion  touching  the  word  upevs. 

Mr.  Pope  added  to  the  Report  this  note; — "I  beg  to  say,  in  reference  to 
the  statement  concerning  Stephen,  that  Cyprian  strongly  reprehends  him  as 
*  endeavouring  to  assert  the  cause  of  heretics  against  the  church  of  God,'  but 
applies  the  words  *  he  has  not  God,'  &c.  to  the  heretics  of  whom  he  speaks, 
and  not  to  him.    Cyprian. — Oper.  Ep.  74.  ad  Pompeium.  Oxford,  1682. 

"Richard  T.  P.  Pope." 

Mr.  Maguire  added  the  following : — "  In  the  description  of  the  council  of 
Basil,  the  Arians  who  disturbed  the  council  of  Rimini,  are  mentioned  throagh 
mistake.  T.  Maguirk." 


THE    END. 


vCV 


a.e 


Aa* 


